This article argues that private law, specifically tort law, should adopt a notion of a �cause� that is wider than the relation of necessity that is encapsulated in the traditional but-for test. The law may have an interest in the relation between an indivisible injury and a specific tortious contribution to the mechanism by which it occurred, which contribution was unnecessary because the relevant element of that mechanism was �over-subscribed�. The suggested approach facilitates separation of...[Show more]
|Collections||ANU Research Publications|
|Source:||Law Quarterly Review|
|01_Stapleton_Unnecessary_Causes_2013.pdf||1.02 MB||Adobe PDF||Request a copy|
|02_Stapleton_Unnecessary_Causes_2013.pdf||4.09 MB||Adobe PDF||Request a copy|
|03_Stapleton_Unnecessary_Causes_2013.pdf||8.56 MB||Adobe PDF||Request a copy|
Items in Open Research are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.