D‘s mother still would have died but for D poisoning her tea. No factual causation.
R v Pagett [1983]
D’s girlfriend wouldn’t have died but for D shooting at armed police. Factual causation. Acts of a third party.
R v Smith [1959]
V‘s stab wound was the operative and substantial cause of death, not the CPR, so D was guilty. Legal causation.
Types of intervening acts
Acts of the victim
Acts of a third party
Acts of 'God’
R v Roberts [1971]
V jumped out D’s car to avoid sexual advances, this did not break the chain of causation. Acts of the victim.
Types of causation
Factual
Legal
Factual causation
Consequence only occurred as a result of D’s conduct
Legal causation
Consequence caused by D’s culpable act. The chain of causation must be unbroken.
Test for factual causation
The but for test. Asks if the consequence would have happened without D’s conduct.
Test for legal causation
The operative and substantial test. Asks if D’s conduct was significant in causing the consequence.
Chain of causation
The unbroken chain of events from D’s conduct to the consequence.
Novus actus interveniens
A newinterveningact is an event that happens between D’s act and the consequence. It only breaks the chain of causation if it’s unreasonable and unforeseeable.
R v Jordan [1956]
When the third party is a medic, the treatment must be unreasonable,unforeseeable and palpably wrong to break the chain of causation.
R v Williams [1993]
V jumped out D’s car to avoid threat of robbery, this did break the chain of causation. Acts of the victim.
Acts of God
These are natural and unpredictable events such as floods, earthquakes, bolts of lightning, etc.
R v Blaue [1975]
D stabbed V, a Jehovah’s Witness, who refused a blood transfusion and died. D was still guilty. The Thin Skull Rule.
The Thin Skull Rule
D must take V as they find them. Hidden vulnerabilities do not break the chain of causation, such as phobias and physical conditions or allergies.