The second factor which is necessary for a claimant to impose claim on other person is to have a cause for the action taken by him. Hence it is important to have a proper link between the breach caused by one person and the damage which has been done to other person. The general test would be why the damage has been done and action which is necessary for damage to be done. Case of McGhee vs National coal board, 1971 is a typical example of the above causation principle. In this case McGhee claimed over the hospital for the skin infection which was caused by the improper medicine being given by the hospital hence the main cause of the skin infection was the medicine given to him. Due to causation principle hospital was found liable for their action.
Another example of the causation principle is case of Barnett vs Chelsea Hospital management, 1968 where in Barnett swallowed the Arsenic and thereafter he was taken to the hospital. In hospital doctor denied to diagnose the patient and patient died after some time. But in this case there was no liability on the doctor due to causation principle as the damage was already done to the patient and patient would have died regardless of the diagnosis. Hence in this case there was no cause of damage involved from the side of doctor as it was involved in case of the McGhee vs National coal board case.
In our case wherein builder have poured in neat varnish in the bottle labelled with varnish there involved principle of causation. When builder is pouring varnish in water labelled bottle and leaving it unattended in this case there can be damage caused to the people who may use the bottle. Hence the cause is being linked with the damage done to any person. The general test which is applicable on the causation principle shows that there is strong relationship in our case between the breach and the damage being done. Due to breach and damage, causation has been developed between the two which is the main reason of the damage being caused to the person who have used the bottle. Hence the builder who has poured in varnish in water labelled bottle would be entirely liable for the damage being done to the person who have unknowingly used the water bottle. It shows that in our case causation is the main reason of the liability being imposed on the builder and there is no fault from the side of person who is using the bottle. Hence general test is applicable in all the conditions where in we have to find out liability of a person due to cause of damage and breach from that person.
Tort law assignment help is a part of law assignment help service that our online law assignment help experts provide. Law homework help in other law topics is also available to law students at a fairly cheap price.