Novus actus interveniens

Created by

Harry

Cards (6)

What is novus actus interveniens?
An intervening act which breaks the chain of causation:
defendant will no longer be regarded as legal cause
therefore no longer guilty of offence
What is the test used to determine if third party intervention has broke the chain of causation?
The acts of a third party will only break the chain of causation where their acts were:
sufficiently unforeseeable and independent in relation to the defendant's conduct
as seen in R v Pagett
What is the test used to determine if poor medical treatment is significant enough to break the chain of causation?
Poor medical treatment will only break the chain of causation where it is:
so overwhelmingly bad it renders the defendant's original actions so insignificant
that it has clearly become the cause of the final injury
as seen in R v Smith
What test is applied to determine if the victim's own acts broke the chain of causation?
The courts will consider if the victim's actions were:
reasonably foreseeable within the context of the defendant's actions, if they weren't then the chain of causation will be broken.
as seen in R v Roberts
negligence on the part of the victim, failure to seek medical treatment, doesn't break the chain of causation
as seen in R v Holland
How is the thin skull rule relevant in regard to the chain of causation?
In the event that:
a victim has a pre-existing condition that worsens the harm suffered, the defendant will remain fully liable
as seen in R v Hayward
victims beliefs are also covered under this rule - R v Blaue
e.g. if they believe in holistic treatments over clinical treatments and die as a result of failing to seek adequate medical treatment chain of causation isn't broken
What test must be satisfied in order for a natural event or disaster to break the chain of causation?
The courts will consider whether what's occurred is:
so significant and unforeseeable that it's become the operating cause of the criminal consequence