Wilsher v. Essex Area Health Authority
- Wilsher v. Essex Area Health Authority
"Wilsher v. Essex Area Health Authority" [1988] AC 1074 is an English tort law case concerning the "material increase of risk" test for causation.
Facts
The defendant hospital, initially acting through an inexperienced junior doctor, negligently administered excessive oxygen during the post-natal care of a premature child who subsequently became blind. Excessive oxygen was, according to the medical evidence, one of six possible factors that could have led to blindness. On the "balance of probabilities" test, the hospital would therefore not be liable, but on the "material increase of risk" test, which had been applied in the prior case of "McGhee v. National Coal Board" the hospital would have been found to have increased the risk of harm, and be liable.
Judgment
The House of Lords found that it was impossible to say that it had caused, or materially contributed, to the injury and the claim was dismissed. In a minority view, Mustill LJ. argued that if it is established that conduct of a certain kind materially adds to the risk of injury, if the defendant engages in such conduct in breach of a common law duty, and if the injury is the kind to which the conduct related, then the defendant is taken to have caused the injury even though the existence and extent of the contribution made by the breach cannot be ascertained.
ee also
*Negligence
*Causation in English law
Notes
Wikimedia Foundation.
2010.
Look at other dictionaries:
Breaking the chain — English Tort law Part of the common law series Negligence Duty of care Bolam test Breach of duty Causation … Wikipedia
Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee — Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee ( [1957] 1 WLR 583) is an English tort law case that lays down the typical rule for assessing the appropriate standard of reasonable care in negligence: the Bolam test . Where the defendant has… … Wikipedia
Breach of duty in English law — In tort, there can be no liability in negligence unless the claimant establishes both that he or she was owed a duty of care by the defendant, and that there has been a breach of that duty. The defendant is in breach of duty towards the claimant… … Wikipedia
Nigel Bridge, Baron Bridge of Harwich — Nigel Cyprian Bridge, Baron Bridge of Harwich PC (26 February 1917 – 20 November 2007) was a British barrister and judge. Bridge was the presiding judge at the trial of the Birmingham six in 1975, the verdict of which was quashed by the Court of… … Wikipedia
McGhee v. National Coal Board — McGhee v National Coal Board , [1972] 3 All E.R. 1008, 1 W.L.R. 1, is a leading tort case decided by the House of Lords. The Lords held that where a breach of duty has a material effect on the likelihood of injury then the subsequent injury will… … Wikipedia
Nettleship v. Weston — English case infobox name=Nettleship v. Weston court=Court of Appeal (Civil Division) date decided= 30 June 1971 full name= Nettleship v. Weston citations= [1971] 2 Q.B. 691; [1971] 3 W.L.R. 370; [1971] 3 All E.R. 581; [1971] R.T.R. 425; (1971)… … Wikipedia
Wells v. Cooper — (1958) 2 All ER 527 is an England and Wales Court of Appeal judgment dealing with the issue of standard of care in English tort law. The question in the case was what standard of care could be expected of a person who carries out repairs in his… … Wikipedia
Mullin v. Richards — Mullins v. Richards [1998] 1 All ER 920 is a judgment of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, dealing with liability of children under English law of negligence. The question in the case was what standard of behaviour could be expected of a… … Wikipedia
McGhee v National Coal Board — McGhee v National Coal Board, [1972] 3 All E.R. 1008, 1 W.L.R. 1, is a leading tort case decided by the House of Lords. The Lords held that where a breach of duty has a material effect on the likelihood of injury then the subsequent injury will… … Wikipedia
Mullin v Richards — Mullins v Richards [1998] 1 All ER 920 is a judgment of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, dealing with liability of children under English law of negligence. The question in the case was what standard of behaviour could be expected of a… … Wikipedia
