A Level Law Practice Exam

What does factual causation establish in legal terms?

1. D's actions must be the sole cause of harm

2. Harm would not have occurred but for D’s actions

3. It requires evidence of intent to cause harm

4. D must be proven innocent until proven guilty

The correct answer is: Harm would not have occurred but for D’s actions

Factual causation is established by demonstrating that the harm would not have occurred "but for" the actions of the defendant. This principle is a fundamental element in tort law, particularly in negligence cases, where the plaintiff needs to show that the defendant's conduct is directly linked to the damage suffered. In other words, if the defendant had not acted in a certain way, the injury would not have happened. This test focuses on the direct cause-and-effect relationship between the defendant's actions and the resulting harm, ensuring that there is a clear connection necessary to hold the defendant liable. The other choices do not accurately reflect the concept of factual causation. The idea that the defendant's actions must be the sole cause of harm misinterprets the notion of causation since multiple factors can contribute to harm. The requirement of intent to cause harm pertains to different areas of law, such as intentional torts, rather than factual causation. Lastly, the presumption of innocence until proven guilty is an important principle in criminal law, not directly related to the factual causation discussed in tort law contexts.