Where a plaintiff proves that a defendant's negligent act caused some disruption to business but the plaintiff's own evidence reveals multiple other contributing causes of delay, the plaintiff has not discharged the onus of proving the defendant's act caused the entirety of the delay. However, the plaintiff is entitled to damages for the period of disruption actually proved, measured by an averaging of historical revenue where precise calculation is not possible. A claim for loss of opportunity to perform other work requires evidence of specific work opportunities that were available and the likely profit therefrom.
The full text is available to signed-in members.