CAUSATION

• what is causation?

  the prosecution must prove that the defendant caused the consequences.
• what 3 things must be proved for causation

  factual causation

  legal causation

  the chain of causation
• what is factual casuation?

  but for test --> the D will only be guilty if the consequences would not have happened BUT for D's conduct --> R v Paggett
• how do we establish legal causation?

  the deminimis princaple --> R v Kimsey --> the D need not be the substantial cause but must be more than the minimal/trivial cause
• what is the thin skull rule?

  if the victim has something unusual about their physical or mental health that make the injury worse then the D is still guilty. --> R v Blau
• what can break the chain of causation?

  an act of a third party

  the victims own actions

  a natural but unpredictable event
• what is an example of an act of a third party?

  medical treatment.
• what does R v Smith say about medical treatment?

  R v Smith --> if medical treatment is not the operative and substantive cause of death then it does not break the chain of causation.
• what does R v Cheshire say about medical treatment

  medical treatment must be so independant and powerful in itself that it breaks the chain of causation - R v Cheshire
• what does R v Jordan say about medical treatment?

  medical treatment must be palpably wrong to break the chain of causation --> R v Jordan
• does switching off life support break the chain of causation?

  no, the defendant will still be guilty --> R v Malcharek
• do police actions break the chain of causation?

  only if their acts are unreasonable but the courts are reluctant to blame police officers
• victims own actions

  if D causes V to react in a foreseeable way, then the D will be liable for any injury caused
• what does R v Roberts say about V's own actions?

  if V's actions are reasonably foreseeable then D will be liable for any injury --> R v Roberts
• what does R v Marjoram say about victims own actions?

  if the V's actions were their only means of escape then their actions are reasonably foreseeable --> R v Marjoram
• what does R v William and davis say about causation

  the V's actions must be proportional to the D's threat for them to be liable - R v William and Davis
• natural events

  A natural event can break the chain of causation if it is unforeseeable and it directly causes the harm