Logged out
Access All our Essays in an Instant
Swap your work for FREE access, or pay £4.99 for instant access
‘In recent times, the House of Lords has given up any attempt to examine causation questions in a systematic manner. If their Lordships feel the claimant deserve compensation they will bend the rules to achieve that result.’
Member rating: No Rating | Words: 1336 | Submitted: Sun May 04 2008
Page Preview
On the left is an image preview of every page of this document, and below are the first 150 words with formatting removed:
'In recent times, the House of Lords has given up any attempt to examine causation questions in a systematic manner. If their Lordships feel the claimant deserve compensation they will bend the rules to achieve that result.' Discuss. Recent cases such as Barker v Corus1,Gregg v Scott,2Chester v Afshar3 and Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd4 have certainly diverted away from the standard 'but for' test of causation. However, this does not necessarily mean that the House of lords are willing to 'bend the rules'; and that they have stopped developing the case law in a systematic manner. This attempt will attempt to examine the decisions in these four recent cases and therefore show that the law has developed in a systematic manner; and is not simply based on whether their Lordships emphasise with the claimant or not. It must first be established what the 'rules' the statement mention are- * The standard 'but for'...
To see the full version of this document, and 143,642 others
