coady.pdf (373.04 kB)
Testing for causation in tort law
The traditional, intuitively appealing, test for causation in tort law, known as 'the but-for test' has been subjected to what are widely believed to be devastating criticisms by Tony Honore, and Richard Wright, amongst others. I argue that the but-for test can withstand these criticisms. Contrary to what is now widely believed, there is no inconsistency between the but for test and ordinary language, commonsense, or sound legal principle.
History
Publication title
Australian Journal of Legal PhilosophyVolume
27Pagination
83-95ISSN
1440-4982Publication status
- Published
Rights statement
Copyright 2002 the Australilan Journal of Legal Philosophy and the AuthorRepository Status
- Open