Do you want BuboFlash to help you learning these things? Or do you want to add or correct something? Click here to log in or create user.



Tags
#clinical-negligence #negligence #tort
Question
It should be noted that in [case], as in previous exceptional cases, such as Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw (1956) AC 613, it was not possible to scientifically prove the contribution made by the negligence so a departure of the ’but for’ test was used to achieve justice. It is likely that the strict application of the ’but for’ test will still be used in the majority of cases involving medical negligence.
Answer
Bailey v Ministry of Defence [2008] EWCA Civ 883

Tags
#clinical-negligence #negligence #tort
Question
It should be noted that in [case], as in previous exceptional cases, such as Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw (1956) AC 613, it was not possible to scientifically prove the contribution made by the negligence so a departure of the ’but for’ test was used to achieve justice. It is likely that the strict application of the ’but for’ test will still be used in the majority of cases involving medical negligence.
Answer
?

Tags
#clinical-negligence #negligence #tort
Question
It should be noted that in [case], as in previous exceptional cases, such as Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw (1956) AC 613, it was not possible to scientifically prove the contribution made by the negligence so a departure of the ’but for’ test was used to achieve justice. It is likely that the strict application of the ’but for’ test will still be used in the majority of cases involving medical negligence.
Answer
Bailey v Ministry of Defence [2008] EWCA Civ 883
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
It should be noted that in Bailey v Ministry of Defence [2008] EWCA Civ 883, as in previous exceptional cases, such as Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw (1956) AC 613, it was not possible to scientifically prove the contribution made by the negligence so a depa

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs

Summary

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Details

No repetitions


Discussion

Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.