Log In Concurrent Causation: Definition
Concurrent causation refers to insurance claims that cover losses and damages caused by more than one cause. Concurrent causation has roots in court rulings and opinions. This creates a body of legal precedent. This can be useful for parties to a dispute who need the courtās decision.
Concurrent causation is an insurance term that refers to property losses due to two causes. The damages caused by both of these causes will likely have coverage depending on the circumstances.
Moreover, the type and jurisdiction in which the disagreements are heard. In liability insurance policies, concurrent causation could also have consideration.
Table of Contents
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- Concurrent causation is a legal theory that allows plaintiffs to recover damages from multiple defendants when two or more causes contribute to the plaintiff’s injuries.
- The doctrine of concurrent causation is based on the principle that each person who contributes to causing an injury should be responsible for compensating the victim.
- Concurrent causation can come into play in many different types of accidents but is most commonly seen in car accidents and slip and fall cases.
What Is Concurrent Causation?
Concurrent causation is a legal concept that determines liability for a claim. It is where two or more different actions hold responsible for causing an injury.
Concurrent causation gets resolved by determining which of the actions took place at the same time and which was the cause of the other. Property damage can include anything from flood damage to damage from wind.
So before your home suffers substantial damage, you first want to make sure you have coverage for damage caused by natural disasters. Your insurance company will then accept your claims for damages.
In the matter of concurrent causation, however, there will be two causes to consider. For example, your home might sustain substantial damage due to heavy rain and electrical damage.
Your insurance provider will look at the extent of damage to determine the root cause. They will record the damage with photographs and conduct an inspection of your property. Itās important to note that damage to property can take on many forms. For example:
- Flooding damage
- Earthquake damage
- Landslide damage
- Damage to structure
- Roof damage
- Rainwater damage
- Smoke damage
- Wind damage
But property isnāt the only thing covered by concurrent causation. Damage to people must also fall under consideration and coverage.
A basic example of this is if a person trips on a loose carpet and falls onto a table, and then falls again onto a floor and breaks a bone. A court will likely hold both the carpet manufacturer and the floor manufacturer responsible. Why? Because they are both to blame for both injuries.
If two people get injured by the same event, it is possible to hold all of the people responsible who are directly responsible for causing the injury.
The people who are liable will be those who were negligent and acted with a reckless disregard for the safety of another. If a person was in anotherās care, they may be liable if they were negligent.
Conclusions: Is Concurrent Causation Worth Resolving in Your Case?
For most cases, concurrent causation is not worth the time to resolve. However, there may be a rare situation where you want to resolve concurrent causation in your case.
If, for example, you are suing all of the people at the gym for causing minor injuries. You’re doing this because of the negligence of the owners. As such, you may want to add a concurrent causation claim because you would be able to hold more people responsible.
Examples of Concurrent Causation Disputes
There are a variety of different examples of concurrent causation disputes. Perhaps the most common example that arises in court is a case of medical negligence. This is where an individual is not given proper care due to the negligence of the medical provider.
In these cases, it is often the hospital or the medical provider responsible for the damages caused by the negligent actions.
In another example, a person gets injured while trespassing on anotherās property. Trespassing is a legal activity that is always done at the personās own risk. People who trespass on private property are doing so at their own risk.
If someone is trespassing and gets injured on private property, the property owner is not legally responsible for the injury. They can, however, sue for damages resulting from the trespassing.
Summary
Concurrent causation is often complex. If you are facing a concurrent causation dispute in court, there are several different ways you can resolve the issue. The most important thing to remember is that you should always contact a lawyer in the jurisdiction where the incident happened.
Frequently Asked Questions about Concurrent Causes
When two or more perils are operating simultaneously to cause a loss. Here, the cause that has the greatest impact on causing the loss under a policy for first-party property is the most important.
Coinsurance clauses are often included in business insurance policies. Here, the total amount of insurance (the limit) must be equal to or greater than a certain percentage of the insured property.
Concurrent causation refers to property insurance. This doctrine can be used when property is damaged by multiple causes. Some of these are exempt. If the doctrine applies, the insurer must cover the entire loss if the policy covers at least one cause.
Property insurance, professional liability insurance, and data breach.
No, unfortunately. Each home is different, so you will need a policy tailored to each building.
Share: