When can causation be proven in a legal context?

Causation in a legal context refers to the relationship between a defendant's actions (or breach of duty) and the harm that resulted. To prove causation, one must establish that the breach of duty directly led to the injury or damage suffered by the plaintiff. This direct link is crucial because it shows that the harm would not have occurred without the defendant's actions, establishing the foundational principle of "cause in fact."

In legal cases, the mere presence of an assumption of risk does not prove causation; instead, it typically addresses the plaintiff's acknowledgment of the risks involved and may affect liability but not the direct causation of harm. Similarly, chaos being unavoidable does not establish a causal link — it merely represents a circumstance that does not directly correlate to the actions leading to the injury. Finally, the lodging of a complaint is a procedural step in legal proceedings but does not itself prove causation; it initiates the legal process where causation will need to be argued and established. Thus, the choice emphasizing the direct link between breach of duty and injury accurately captures the core component necessary to demonstrate causation in a legal context.