Novus actus interveniens Scenario

1) Sir in Lamb V Camden 1981, in which defendant negligently caused a house to be damaged, and as a result it had to be vacated until it could be repaired. During the vacant period, squatters took up residence and the property suffered further damage.

Sir here, casual link was broken due to act of 3rd party (squatters), so obviously defendant would not be liable for additional damages caused by squatters, BUT would he be liable for the damage which was caused because of his negligence?

2) Sir in Carslogie Steamship Co Ltd V Royal Govt (1952), The claimant’s ship was damaged in a collision as a result of the defendant’s negligence. The ship was en route to have the resulting repairs carried out. On the way ship was further damaged by heavy weather and a consequence took a longer period of time to repair.

Sir here, casual link was broken due to natural disaster, so obviously defendant would not be liable for additional damages caused by weather conditions, BUT would he be liable for the damage which was caused because of his negligence?