Which test is used to establish factual causation in tort law?

• A. But-for test
• B. Foreseeability test
• C. Causation in fact test
• D. Material contribution test

Answer: (A)

In tort law, factual causation asks whether the defendant’s breach actually caused the plaintiff’s harm. The test used to determine this is the but-for test: would the injury have occurred if the defendant had not acted as they did? If yes, there is factual causation; if no, the causal link is not established. The other option, foreseeability, deals with legal causation and whether the harm was a foreseeable consequence of the defendant’s actions—not whether the harm would have happened but for those actions. The phrase causation in fact describes the general idea but isn’t a separate test you apply; the but-for test is the standard. The material contribution test is a specialized exception used when several contributors exist and no single factor would have caused the injury by itself; it’s not the ordinary method for determining factual causation in straightforward cases.