Skip to main content
Article
Material Contribution in Bonnington: Not An Exception To 'But For' Causation
University of Western Australia Law Review (2022)
  • Neil J Foster
Abstract
The courts have wrestled for some years with what Lord Reid meant in Bonnington
Castings Ltd v Wardlaw [1956] AC 613 when he said that '[the plaintiff] must make
it appear at least that on a balance of probabilities the breach of duty caused
or materially contributed to his injury'. Some have taken this to mean that 'material
contribution' is something different to classic 'but for' causation. The aim of the
article is to demonstrate that this is not correct; that 'material contribution'
in Bonnington is an example of, not an exception to, 'but for' causation; and to argue
that this misreading of the case should no longer be perpetuated.
Keywords
  • Causation,
  • Material Contribution,
  • But For Test,
  • Bonnington
Disciplines
Publication Date
2022
Citation Information
Neil J Foster. "Material Contribution in Bonnington: Not An Exception To 'But For' Causation" University of Western Australia Law Review Vol. 49 Iss. 1 (2022) p. 404 - 425
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/neil_foster/142/