Bailey v Ministry of Defence [2009] 1 WLR 1052

Facts

  • The claimant suffered severe complications following medical treatment provided by the Ministry of Defence.
  • Multiple factors contributed to the claimant’s injury, including alleged negligent post-operative care as well as pre-existing conditions and other non-negligent factors.
  • The claimant contended that the defendant’s negligence materially contributed to her injuries, even though the injuries had multiple causes.

Issues

  1. Whether the defendant's material contribution to the claimant’s injury was sufficient to establish liability in circumstances involving multiple causative factors.
  2. Whether the traditional "but for" test of causation is appropriate where harm arises from a combination of negligent and non-negligent factors.
  3. Whether precise quantification of the defendant’s role in the causation of harm is required for liability.

Decision

  • The Court of Appeal held that a defendant may be liable if their negligence made a material contribution to the injury, even where other non-negligent factors were also causative.
  • The Court found that the "but for" test is inadequate in cases involving multiple concurrent or sequential causative factors.
  • The defendant’s contribution to the harm need not be the primary or dominant cause; it suffices if it is more than negligible.
  • The Court confirmed that liability can be established without precise quantification of the defendant’s role, based on the overall evidence.

Legal Principles

  • Where multiple factors cause harm, liability in tort may be established if the defendant’s negligence materially contributed to the injury, not just if it was the sole or principal cause.
  • The traditional "but for" test may be set aside in favour of a material contribution test in complex causation scenarios.
  • Material contribution requires the defendant’s conduct to be more than negligible, but does not need to be precisely quantified.
  • This approach is particularly applicable in medical negligence cases and situations with complex or multifactorial causation.

Conclusion

Bailey v Ministry of Defence [2009] 1 WLR 1052 established that in tort law, a defendant’s material contribution to harm suffices for liability, providing a more flexible framework for causation in cases with multiple contributing factors, and particularly influencing claims in medical negligence and other complex contexts.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal