Causation in negligence: from anti-jurisprudence to principle--individual responsibility as the cornerstone for the attribution of liability.

Causation is one of the most esoteric and poorly defined legal principles. The common law standards of the "but for" test and common sense are, in reality, code for unconstrained judicial choice. This leads to a high degree of unpredictability in negligence cases. Changes to the causation standard following the torts reforms have done nothing to inject principle into this area of law: the concept of "appropriateness" is no more illuminating than common sense. Despite this, the trend of recent High Court decisions offers some prospect of clarifying the test for causation. Key themes to emerge are an increased emphasis on individual responsibility and the associated concept of coherency with other legal standards. This article examines the doctrinal reasons underpinning the increasingly important role of these ideals and suggests how they can be accommodated into the test for causation to inject greater coherence and predictability into this area of law.