▁occurrence . ▁The ▁test ▁is ▁ ▁really ▁whether ▁the ▁engineer ▁ought ▁to ▁have ▁for ese en ▁the ▁out break ▁of ▁fire , ▁i . e . ▁the ▁type ▁of ▁consequence ▁ought ▁to ▁have ▁been ▁for ese en . ▁ ▁Sign ific ance ▁ ▁This ▁idea ▁of ▁a ▁balance ▁between ▁magnitude ▁and ▁serious ness ▁of ▁risk ▁is ▁similar ▁to ▁that ▁proposed ▁by ▁Lear ned ▁Hand ▁in ▁United ▁States ▁v . ▁Car roll ▁Tow ing ▁Co . ▁ 1 5 9 ▁F . 2 d ▁ 1 6 9 ▁( 2 d ▁Cir . ▁ 1 9 4 7 ) ▁on ▁the ▁subject ▁of ▁legal ▁caus ation . ▁Such ▁a ▁form ulation ▁of ▁the ▁issue ▁has ▁struck ▁some ▁in ▁the ▁field ▁as ▁an ▁argument ▁along ▁the ▁lines ▁typically ▁made ▁in ▁the ▁Law ▁& ▁Econom ics ▁camp ▁usually ▁seen ▁to ▁be ▁represented ▁by ▁the ▁American ▁Judge ▁Richard ▁Pos ner . ▁ ▁The ▁holding ▁in ▁this ▁case ▁was ▁har sh ly ▁critic ized ▁for ▁its ▁" over loading ▁of ▁the ▁for ese e ability ▁concept " ▁by ▁ren owned ▁tort s ▁scholar ▁Leon ▁A . ▁Green . ▁ ▁References ▁ ▁See ▁also ▁▁ ▁Re ▁P ole mis , ▁[ 1 9 2 1 ] ▁ 3 ▁K . B . ▁ 5 6 0 ▁ ▁List ▁of ▁Jud icial ▁Committee ▁of ▁the ▁Priv y ▁Council ▁cases ▁ ▁Category : J ud icial ▁Committee ▁of ▁the ▁Priv y ▁Council ▁cases ▁on ▁appeal ▁from ▁Australia ▁Category : English ▁tort ▁case ▁law ▁Category : 1 9 6 6 ▁in ▁Australian