ABSTRACT
Various Claimants v Giambrone & Law (A Firm) (Giambrone), as a Court of Appeal decision, holds significant referential value for subsequent courts interpreting the rule established in AIB Group (UK) Plc v Redler (AIB). However, current literature lacks a thorough examination of Jackson LJ’s reasoning in Giambrone, particularly in his interpretation and application of the causation test. This short article addresses this gap by identifying a discrepancy between Jackson LJ’s judgment and the causation test employed in AIB. By examining this inconsistency, the authors highlight the areas where Jackson LJ’s analysis diverges from the AIB rule and its potential implications for future cases.
Jing, Hui and Xiao, Han, Causation in Equitable Compensation: But For Test without Novus Actus Interveniens? (June 1, 2023), (2024) 88(1) Conveyancer and Property Lawyer 31-39.
Leave a Reply