Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Causation
PROVING THINGS 233: ASSESSING EVIDENCE AFTER 14 YEARS: THE CRUEL CONCEPT OF CAUSATION IN MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE

PROVING THINGS 233: ASSESSING EVIDENCE AFTER 14 YEARS: THE CRUEL CONCEPT OF CAUSATION IN MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE

May 19, 2022 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked many times at issues relating to witness evidence and the judicial approach when hearing evidence of matters that happened a considerable time before trial.  The difficulties are made clear in the judgment of HHJ Emma Kelly…

PROVING THINGS 218: THE NEED TO PROVE CAUSATION IN ADDITION TO BREACH OF DUTY

PROVING THINGS 218: THE NEED TO PROVE CAUSATION IN ADDITION TO BREACH OF DUTY

November 22, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Personal Injury

The Court of Appeal judgment in Cunningham v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council [2021] EWCA Civ 1719 highlights the need to prove issues of causation in addition to breach of duty. THE CASE The claimant is a teacher who was attacked…

PROVING THINGS 165: CLAIMANT IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE PROVES NEGLIGENCE BUT FAILS TO ESTABLISH CAUSATION

PROVING THINGS 165: CLAIMANT IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE PROVES NEGLIGENCE BUT FAILS TO ESTABLISH CAUSATION

October 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content

In Bell v Bedford Hospital NHS Trust [2019] EWHC 2704 (QB) the claimant established clinical negligence but failed to prove causation.   THE CASE The claimant suffered a major stroke that left her with significant permanent disabilities.  She claimed that…

PROVING THINGS 129: IMPATIENT PATIENT DID NOT BREAK THE CHAIN OF CAUSATION: SUPREME COURT DECISION TODAY

PROVING THINGS 129: IMPATIENT PATIENT DID NOT BREAK THE CHAIN OF CAUSATION: SUPREME COURT DECISION TODAY

October 10, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content

The Supreme Court decision today in Darnley -v- Croydon Health Service NHS Trust [2018]UKSC 50 marks a development in the law of negligence, and also in relation to proving causation. “Far from constituting a break in the chain of causation,…

PROVING THINGS 106: YOU DIDN'T COMPLY WITH YOUR OWN RISK ASSESSMENT AND YOU WANT TO APPEAL:  COURT REJECTS DEFENDANT'S ARGUMENT THAT CLAIMANT FAILED TO PROVE CAUSATION

PROVING THINGS 106: YOU DIDN’T COMPLY WITH YOUR OWN RISK ASSESSMENT AND YOU WANT TO APPEAL: COURT REJECTS DEFENDANT’S ARGUMENT THAT CLAIMANT FAILED TO PROVE CAUSATION

May 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury

In CC v Leeds City Council [2018] EWHC 1312 (QB) Mr Justice Turner reiterates the importance of the risk assessment in personal injury litigation.   On appeal the judge  rejected an argument that a claimant had failed to prove causation. The defendant’s…

PROVING THINGS 103: CAUSATION WHEN THE CLAIMANT TRIED TO ESCAPE FROM A BALCONY:  A TALE OF TWO JUDGMENTS

PROVING THINGS 103: CAUSATION WHEN THE CLAIMANT TRIED TO ESCAPE FROM A BALCONY: A TALE OF TWO JUDGMENTS

May 23, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There is an interesting consideration of causation in the Court of Appeal judgment  today in Clay v TUI UK Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 1177.  This has the flavour of a case that may go further.   There is an interesting dissenting judgment…

ADVISING ON THE "RISKS OF LITIGATION": A HIGH COURT DECISION

July 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Liability, Members Content

In Thomas -v- Albutt [2015] EWHC Mr Justice Morgan considered, among other things, the duty owed by a barrister (and lawyers generally) to warn about the risks of litigation. “Clients, I know, want two inconsistent things. They want confident advice…

CAUSATION AND EVIDENCE – A BURNING PROBLEM? IMPORTANT ISSUES FROM A BIZARRE SET OF FACTS

June 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Graves -v- Brouwer [2015] EWCA Civ 595 the Court of Appeal carried out an extensive review of the principles and authorities relating to evidence and causation.  There is a useful discussion on the role and questioning of experts at…

EVIDENCE AND CAUSATION: COMMON SENSE CAN BE APPLIED

December 14, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

In Soboleska -v- Threlfall [2014] EWHC 4219 (QB) Mr Justice Foskett made some important observations about the use of commonsense in assessing the likely cause of serious injuries suffered in a road traffic accident. THE FACTS The claimant suffered physical…

MORE ON EVIDENCE AND CAUSATION: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

November 28, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury

The previous post dealt with issues of evidence and causation. Similar issues can be seen in the case of Irene Packham -v- Anita Hazari [2014] EWHC 3951 (QB), a decision of Michael Harvey Q.C.  The issue of causation and evidence…

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • EXPERT WATCH 56: A SECTION OF A JUDGMENT THAT SPECIFICALLY CRITICISES A MEDICAL EXPERT: “I WAS STRUCK BY THE ABSENCE OF A RIGOROUS AND CAREFUL MULTIDISCPLINARY APPROACH TO THIS ISSUES IN THIS CASE”
  • EXPERT WATCH 55: WAS THIS WAR? (OR CAUSED BY WAR): TRIAL JUDGE CONSIDERS THE EVIDENCE OF TWO EXPERTS ON GEOPOLITICS, BUT FINDS ONE IS PARTISAN
  • PERSONAL INJURY MATTERS 17 (1): LIABILITY CATCHUP (1): PUB OPERATOR IS NOT VICARIOUSLY LIABLE FOR DOORMEN’S ACTS: A CONCLUSION REACHED “WITH REGRET”
  • COST BITES 411: HOW DOES A COURT DETERMINE THE AMOUNT OF AN INTERIM PAYMENT AS TO COSTS WHEN THE CASE HAS NOT BEEN BUDGETED? SHOULD A PAYMENT BE ORDERED AT ALL?
  • COST BITES 410: A CLAIMANT’S COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES RELATING TO ISSUE AND PLEADING CANNOT BE USED AS A GROUNDS FOR REDUCING ITS RECOVERABLE COSTS

Top Posts

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: AS STRONGLY WORDED A REFUSAL AS I HAVE SEEN: THE CONCEPT "DOES NOT EMBODY A PRINCIPLE OF "BREACH NOW REPENT LATER"
A SOLICITOR SHOULD JUST NOT BE SAYING THIS IS IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: IT "STRAYED WELL BEYOND WHAT SHE COULD LEGALLY GIVE EVIDENCE ABOUT FROM HER OWN KNOWLEDGE INCLUDED HEARSAY FROM AN UNNAMED SOURCE AND INCLUDED STATEMENTS OF OPINION WHICH SHE DID NOT HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO GIVE..."
THE ONLINE PROCEDURE (RULES AND PRACTICE DIRECTIONS) RULES 2026 COME INTO FORCE ON THE 7th SEPTEMBER: HERE IS A SUMMARY (AND THE RULES THEMSLVES)
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND LITIGATION: AN UPDATE ON CONSULTATION FINDINGS FROM THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL
WHERE THINGS WENT WRONG IN LITIGATION (AND STOPPING IT HAPPENING TO YOU) 2: ADVISING A CLIENT THAT THEY ARE NOT LIABLE FOR COSTS BECAUSE PROCEEDINGS HAVE NOT BEEN SERVED

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2026. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.

To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief ®

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

Loading Comments...

You must be logged in to post a comment.