1-6 of 6 Results

  • Keyword: apportionment x
Clear all

Chapter

Cover Tort Law

8. Limitation and Contribution  

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter examines the principles of contribution and their effect on the remedies that can be obtained by a successful claimant, as well as the statutory rules of ‘limitation’ that govern the time-barring of claims. The liability of more than one party for ‘the same damage’ is discussed, together with the apportionment of responsibility for the damage. Relevant provisions found in the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 and the Limitation Act 1980 are also considered.

Chapter

Cover Essential Cases: Equity & Trusts

Murad v Al-Saraj [2005] EWCA Civ 959, Court of Appeal  

Essential Cases: Equity & Trusts provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Murad v Al-Saraj [2005] EWCA Civ 959, Court of Appeal. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Derek Whayman.

Chapter

Cover Essential Cases: Equity & Trusts

Murad v Al-Saraj [2005] EWCA Civ 959, Court of Appeal  

Essential Cases: Equity & Trusts provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Murad v Al-Saraj [2005] EWCA Civ 959, Court of Appeal. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Derek Whayman.

Chapter

Cover Tort Law Concentrate

16. Defences and limitation  

This chapter first discusses the defence of contributory negligence, voluntary assumption of risk, and illegality. Contributory negligence occurs when the claimant has contributed to his own damage, and permits damages to be apportioned according to what is just and equitable. Voluntary assumption of risk is a complete defence, on the basis that the claimant freely agreed to run the risk of damage. Illegality is a complete defence, on the grounds that the law will not reward or appear to condone an illegal act. The chapter then turns to limitation periods, which restrict the amount of time within which legal actions must be commenced. The main statute is the Limitation Act 1980.

Chapter

Cover Tort Law

7. Defences to Negligence  

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter explores three defences to negligence which are also defences to other torts: volenti non fit injuria or willing assumption of risk, the illegality defence (also known as ex turpi causa), and contributory negligence. In relation to contributory negligence, the chapter considers responsibility, which involves questions both of causal influence and of fault, before turning to a discussion of apportionment of responsibility between the parties, and proportionality. In relation to illegality, recent decisions of the Supreme Court are examined. Relevant provisions of the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 are extracted, together with further extracts from significant cases.

Chapter

Cover Tort Law

6. Causation, Remoteness, and Scope of Duty: Connection to the Damage  

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter examines the essential connection between the defendant’s breach and the damage suffered by the claimant. It explores the elements of factual and legal causation in relation to the tort of negligence. Drawing on recent decisions including Manchester Building Society v Grant Thornton and Khan v Meadows, it identifies the existence of other aspects of attribution including the necessity for the damage to fall within the scope of the defendant’s duty. The chapter continues by examining some of the most challenging problems of causation, all of which concern multiple potential causes. It considers issues relating to ‘material contribution to damage’, and whether a given breach has materially contributed to the risk of injury. It then discusses the idea of loss of chance as well as the controversy surrounding uncertainty, single agents, and apportionment and non-tortious sources with respect to causation. A number of relevant cases are considered, including Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd [2002], Barker v Corus [2006], Durham v BAI (the ‘Trigger’ Litigation) [2012], IEG v Zurich (2015), and Gregg v Scott [2005].