Do you have to?

• show causation of fact then causation of law?

• show causation of fact only?

• show causation of law only?

• show causation of law then causation of fact?

The question is would the claimant have suffered the loss ? ? the defendant's negligance?

The case of Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington Hospital Management Committee (1969) involved a man

• who was suffering from problems with his left hand?

• who was suffering from arsenic poisoning?

• who had a stroke?

The case of Barnett v Chelsea and Kensington Hospital Management Committee (1969) was successful in providing the "but for" test?

• Yes

• No

The issue of policy for doctors was dealt with in Chester v Afshar (2004). This case involved a lady who was

• left paralysed after a back operation

• who was diagnosed with a minor neck injury and then had a stroke

Mesothelioma is a condition relating to the

• lungs?

• heart?

In the case of Fairchild and others v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd 2002 and Others

• stated that a person suffering from mesothelioma would only have to show that one employer's materially increased the risk of contracting the disease to recover full damages.

• stated that a person suffering from mesothelioma would have to show that all employer's materially increased the risk of contracting the disease to recover full damage.

Barker v Corus(UK) plc (2006) stated that all employers are joint and severally liable

• True

• False

The ? Act 2006 came into force to deal with asbestos claims

Jobling v Associated Dairies (1982) stated that a claimant cannot be put in a better position than if he had the injury?

• True

• False