There is a real need to clarify the scope of the doctrine of joint tortfeasance, in view of the constant attempts by plaintifs to widen liability in the search, for the deepest pockets. Part of this clarification involves a reaction to the growing use of ‘accessory liability’ terminology in the civil IUMI generally. There Lire those who argue that whatever the limits of joint tortfeasance liability, the law implicitly accepts liability for ‘facilitators’ us secondary parties to all civil wrongs. The aim of this paper is to clarify the doctrine of joint tortfeasance, to distinguish the liability of those who cause or conspire from those who merely facilitate, and to deny the existence of a wide concept of secondary civil liability.