Novus Actus Interveniens
Share
Novus actus interveniens, Latin for "new intervening act", is a legal doctrine used in Tort Law to determine whether an intervening event or act breaks the chain of causation between the defendant's original wrongful act or negligence and the plaintiff's harm. It is a concept that assesses whether the subsequent act is the primary cause of the harm, relieving the defendant of liability.
Intervening event: Novus actus interveniens refers to a new and independent event or act that occurs after the defendant's wrongful act or negligence but before the plaintiff's harm. The intervening event is an action or occurrence that contributes to the harm suffered by the plaintiff.
Breaking the chain of causation: The purpose of novus actus interveniens is to determine whether the intervening event breaks the chain of causation between the defendant's conduct and the plaintiff's harm. If the court finds that the intervening event is the predominant cause of the harm, it may relieve the defendant of liability.
Unforeseeability: For an intervening event to be considered a novus actus interveniens, it is generally required to be unforeseeable by the defendant at the time of their wrongful act or negligence. The event must be highly unusual or abnormal, going beyond what could reasonably be anticipated.
Independent and intervening act: The novus actus interveniens must be an independent and intervening act that significantly contributes to the harm suffered by the plaintiff. It operates as a new cause that breaks the causal connection between the defendant's actions and the plaintiff's injuries in a way that makes it unjust or unfair to hold the defendant responsible.
Superseding cause: The concept of novus actus interveniens is closely related to the concept of superseding cause. While both involve intervening events, a superseding cause relieves the defendant of liability entirely, whereas a novus actus interveniens may still allow some level of liability for the defendant if the connection between their original act and the harm remains intact.
Foreseeable intervening events: It is important to note that not all intervening events are considered novus actus interveniens. If the intervening event was reasonably foreseeable by the defendant, even if unlikely, it may not break the chain of causation and may not relieve the defendant of liability.
The application of novus actus interveniens can be complex and fact-specific. Courts consider factors such as foreseeability, the nature of the intervening event, the relationship between the defendant's conduct and the harm, and policy considerations when determining whether the intervening act breaks the chain of causation.
Intervening event: Novus actus interveniens refers to a new and independent event or act that occurs after the defendant's wrongful act or negligence but before the plaintiff's harm. The intervening event is an action or occurrence that contributes to the harm suffered by the plaintiff.
Breaking the chain of causation: The purpose of novus actus interveniens is to determine whether the intervening event breaks the chain of causation between the defendant's conduct and the plaintiff's harm. If the court finds that the intervening event is the predominant cause of the harm, it may relieve the defendant of liability.
Unforeseeability: For an intervening event to be considered a novus actus interveniens, it is generally required to be unforeseeable by the defendant at the time of their wrongful act or negligence. The event must be highly unusual or abnormal, going beyond what could reasonably be anticipated.
Independent and intervening act: The novus actus interveniens must be an independent and intervening act that significantly contributes to the harm suffered by the plaintiff. It operates as a new cause that breaks the causal connection between the defendant's actions and the plaintiff's injuries in a way that makes it unjust or unfair to hold the defendant responsible.
Superseding cause: The concept of novus actus interveniens is closely related to the concept of superseding cause. While both involve intervening events, a superseding cause relieves the defendant of liability entirely, whereas a novus actus interveniens may still allow some level of liability for the defendant if the connection between their original act and the harm remains intact.
Foreseeable intervening events: It is important to note that not all intervening events are considered novus actus interveniens. If the intervening event was reasonably foreseeable by the defendant, even if unlikely, it may not break the chain of causation and may not relieve the defendant of liability.
The application of novus actus interveniens can be complex and fact-specific. Courts consider factors such as foreseeability, the nature of the intervening event, the relationship between the defendant's conduct and the harm, and policy considerations when determining whether the intervening act breaks the chain of causation.
