causation - intervening natural forces

[crespo9]

A hits B with his car and B suffers minor injuries. B is taken to hospital but on the way a freak gust of wind causes a roof tile to fly off smashing through the windscreen of the ambulence. It crashes and B suffers further injuries resulting in blindness.

If the gust of wind is seen as an act of god, and "breaks the chain of causation" making A not liable for her blindness, who is? who can she take action against to receive damages for her blindness or can't she?

[NORMANTHEDOG]

you been watching the simpsons,or is this question for real.

[crespo9]

its for real :)

[Ethel]

In the case of Derdiarian v Felix Construction it was stated:

" If the intervening act is extraordinary and not foreseeable in the normal course of events or so far removed from the defendant�s conduct, it may break the chain of causation."

In your scenario it would be impossible for A to foresee this gust of wind and the consequences.

A is not responsible for the blindness.

Assuming the ambulance driver was driving in a proper manner and the gust of wind could not have been foreseen by an ambulance driver driving in a manner considered reasonable in all circumstances, then he is not responsible either.

Was the roof maintained or had the property owner been negligent to a degree that an ordinary property owner would consider the roof to be in an immediately dangerous condition? Could he be liable?

[Peter Pedant]

Go to a book with Tort in the title

something like A textbook in Tort Law

get to thechapter which says novus actus interveniens

and NOW READ IT

and good luck