From Law wiki, the wiki for law research

[1963] AC 837 (HL). The claimant, a boy of eight, was badly burned in an explosion which resulted when he dropped an unattended oil lamp into a hole. There was no doubt that the City Corporation was in breach of its duty to keep the public out of the works area; the question for consideration was whether it was liable for the particular injuries suffered by the claimant. According to the principle in the wagon mound (1961), liability would not extend to injury or damage which was could not reasonably have been forseen as following from the defendant's carelessness. The Corporation argued that the kinds of injuries that would be foreseen included, for example, minor cuts and burns; it could not have been expected to forsee an explosion. The House of lords held that as the injury was caused by burning, and that burning was forseeable, there was a sufficient causal connection to found liability (see causation in negligence). Consequently, it appears that damage is not too remote to found liability if it is overwhelming greater than could reasonably have been forseen, so long as it is of a similar meta that which should reasonably have been forseen.