Which criterion must be met for causation to be established in an intentional tort case?

For causation to be established in an intentional tort case, it is essential that both factual cause and proximate cause be present.

Factual cause, often referred to as "cause in fact," means that the defendant's actions were a necessary condition for the resulting injury—essentially answering the question of whether the harm would have occurred "but for" the defendant's conduct. Proximate cause, on the other hand, pertains to the scope of the defendant's responsibility, focusing on whether the harm was a foreseeable result of the defendant's actions.

In intentional tort cases, for plaintiffs to successfully establish their claims, they must demonstrate that not only did the defendant's conduct lead to the plaintiff's injuries (factual cause), but also that these injuries were a foreseeable result of that conduct (proximate cause). This two-pronged requirement ensures that liability is appropriately assigned to defendants for the consequences of their actions, thus providing a fair measure of accountability in the legal system.