Practice question
A negligent worker leaves a wheeled cart unsecured on a slope. It rolls downhill and strikes a pedestrian in the ordinary manner that the unsecured slope risk made likely. No efficient intervening cause appears. Which analysis is strongest?
- The injury can be a natural and probable consequence of leaving the cart unsecured.
- Rolling always erases the worker’s causal role.
- Only the cart can be legally examined.
- Any elapsed second necessarily breaks the chain.
- The pedestrian must prove the worker intended the collision.
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html — Civil Code, article2176.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2017/mar2017/gr_164749_2017.html — Abrogar v Cosmos Bottling, GR 164749, March 15 2017, main opinion: natural continuous chain and efficient intervening cause.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2023/jun2023/gr_254395_2023.html — Davao del Norte Electric Cooperative v Heirs of Lucas, GR 254395, June 14 2023, main opinion: foreseeable causal sequence.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.