Rob,
It seems to me, for whatever that is worth, that all I can usefully add is that Richard Wright's forthcoming "NESS Defence" adequately responds to your line of criticism.
Best,
David
From: DAVID CHEIFETZ <davidcheifetz@rogers.com>
To: obligations@uwo.ca
Sent: Wed, March 9, 2011 5:07:11 PM
Subject: UK Supreme Court Decision on Causation
I've read that. I saw your point (I think) but we'll have to disagree on the better analysis. I prefer the NESS analysis. More when I get home and have the text in front of me. Off list might be better.
Best
David
From: Robert Stevens <robert.stevens@ucl.ac.uk>
To: DAVID CHEIFETZ <davidcheifetz@rogers.com>
Sent: Wed, March 9, 2011 4:17:57 PM
Subject: Re: UK Supreme Court Decision on Causation
> What then of the true overdetermined - duplicative causation -
> cases which
> orthodox but-for cannot handle?
>
It can. If you think it can't you are asking the wrong question. see the
chapter on causation in my book.
best
Rob
--
Robert Stevens
Professor of Commercial Law
University College London