scope of risk definition
scope of risk analysis underlies an example given by ▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ in Environment Agency v Empress Car Co (Abertillary) Ltd: ‘A factory owner carelessly leaves a drum containing highly inflammable vapour in a place where it could easily be accidentally ignited. If a ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, thinking it is only an empty drum, throws in a cigarette butt and causes an explosion, one would have no difficulty in saying that the negligence of the owner caused the explosion. On the other hand, if the ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇, knowing exactly what the drum contains, lights a match and ignites it, one would have equally little difficulty in saying that he had caused the explosion and that the carelessness of the owner had merely provided him with an occasion for what he did. One would probably say the same if the drum was struck by lightning. In both cases one would say that although the vapour-filled drum was a necessary condition for the explosion to happen, it was not caused by the owner's negligence. One might add by way of further explanation that the presence of an arsonist ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ or lightning happening to strike at that time and place was a coincidence.’ What is the scope of risk created by the factory owner’s conduct? Leaving an inflammable drum in a public place very arguable creates a risk of its accidental ignition. But it is harder to see the risk as extending to the drum being deliberately ignited or struck by lightning. Of course, determining the risk or risks contemplated by a particular rule of conduct must to some extent be a matter of impression about which opinions may differ. Even so, the principle can help identify a link between the conduct and the damage in appropriate cases and can provide a satisfactory rationale for many of the cases.”