In the context of intentional torts, what establishes causation?

In the context of intentional torts, causation is a crucial element that establishes a link between the defendant's actions and the harm suffered by the plaintiff. The correct answer emphasizes that for a defendant to be held liable, their conduct must be the legal cause of the harm caused to the plaintiff. This means that the plaintiff must prove both factual causation (that the defendant's actions were a direct cause of the injury) and legal causation (that the harm was a foreseeable result of those actions).

Establishing legal causation often involves considering whether it was reasonable to expect that the defendant's conduct would lead to the plaintiff's injury. This determination is critical in tort law because it helps to allocate responsibility for the harm and ensures that liability is appropriately assigned based on the actions that directly led to the negative outcomes experienced by the plaintiff.

In contrast, other options do not adequately capture the principle of causation in tort law. For example, stating that causation is irrelevant to the outcome disregards the foundational aspect of tort litigation, where establishing a causal link is vital for liability. Similarly, claiming that harm must have been intentional does not accurately reflect the fact that an unintentional act could also lead to liability if it meets the criteria for negligence.