· An event that breaks the string of legal motive and may result in the defendant not being criticised for the consequences of their action.

· An act or event that breaks the causal link between a crime committed by the defendant and subsequent events and thus relieves the defendant of responsibility for such activities.


The judge claimed that the claimant's conduct in the effort to save the man led to a novus actus interveniens that breached the chain of causation.


M.V. Kew Bridge vs M.V. Kew Bridge

Mr Pratap also submitted, which is his fourth claim, that when there are interventional causes, novus actus interveniens, it can be regarded as a violation of the causal connection between the wrong and the harm. The actions of the defendant may have met the'but for' test in the sense that the damage would not have occurred without his wrongful conduct, but this in itself does not decide whether he will be held responsible where other causally significant events have played a part.

He further submitted that on the grounds of equity and policy, in the light of subsequent events, the defendant should not be held answerable for consequences beyond his control. It also argued that novus actus interveniens might take three forms, namely:

A merely natural event independent of any human agency;

Act or omission by a third party;

Conduct of the applicant itself

Mr Pratap claimed that the grounding of the defendant's vessel was not the cause of the supposed shutdown of the applicant's factory since even after the grounding of one of the plaintiff's vessels entered and discharged the cargo.

The PIL and the orders of the SDM would be used as a measure of action, that is novus actus interveniens since the effect of the orders issued by the PIL and the SDM would negate the misconduct of the defendant if there were any misconduct at all. So, he was ordered and directed to pay the sum of 3,00,00 (three lakh rupees only).