causation

• what is causation?

  relationship between defendant's conduct & the end result
• what do the prosecution have to show

  unbroken & direct chain of causation
• what are the 3 tests for causation?

  -factual test

  -legal test

  -novus actus interveniens
• what is the factual test aka?

  but-for test
• what is the factual test?

  defendant can only be guilty if the consequence would not have happened as & when it did "but for" Ds conduct
• what are the case examples for the factual test?

  -R v Pagett 1983 CA

  -R v White 1910 CA
• what occurred in R v Pagett?

  -D used girlfriend as human shield

  -D shot at police

  -police shot back, killing girl
• what was the outcome for the defendant in R v Pagett?

  charged - if it wasn't for him she wouldn't have died
• what occurred in R v White?

  -D put cynaide in mother's lemonade

  -mother died of heart failure just befotr she had consumed enough poision to kill her
• what was the outcome for the defendant in R v White

  -NOT charged of murder because mother died of heart failure not from the cynaide

  -D charged of attempted murder instead
• what is the legal point of R v White?

  if the consequence would have happened anyway, D bears no responsibility for the outcome
• what is the legal test aka?

  de minimus rule
• what is the legal test?

  -where D is the SOLE cause of the outcome, legal causation is automatically satisfied

  -if another event happened the de minimus rule allows there to be more than 1 contributing act
• give the case example for the legal test

  R v Kimsey 1996 CA
• what occurred in R v Kimsey?

  -D & V were in a high speed car chase with another unknown driver

  -V lost control of her car & died
• what was the outcome for the defendant in R v Kimsey?

  -D was found guilty of being responsible for the accident
• what 2 principles/rules also fall under the legal test?

  -acceleration principle

  -thin skull rule
• what is the acceleration principle?

  D's act may be considered a cause if it accelerated V's death
• give the case example for the acceleration principle

  R v Adams 1957
• what occurred in R v Adams?

  -Adams (doctor) gave terminally ill patient overdose in painkillers
• what was the outcome for Adams in R v Adams?

  he was acquitted of murder because he used defense of:

  committed the act to get V out of pain
• what is the thin skull rule?

  D must take their victim as they find them

  -if V has something unusual about their physical state that makes injury more serious that what we would think it would be for a normal person, D is liable
• what was the thin skull rule extended to?

  to include victim's beliefs
• give the case example fopr the thin skull rule

  R v Blaue 1975 CA
• what occurred in R v Blaue?

  -D stabbed woman

  -V required blood tranfusion but she refused because she was a jehovas witness

  -V died
• what was the outcome for the defendant in R v Blaue?

  -convicted of voluntary manslaughter

  -despite V's refusal being the cause of her death according to thin skull rule D was liable
• what does novus actus interveniens mean?

  intervening act
• what is the novus actus interveniens rule?

  if there is an intervening act (an event that occurs after Ds conduct & it's sufficiently serious & seperate) this may break the chain of causation
• what are the 3 ways the chain of causation can be broken?

  -actions of a third party

  -actions of the victim

  -an unforseeable natural event
• give the case examples for a third party novus actus interveniens

  -R V Smith 1959 CA

  -R v Cheshire 1991 CA

  -R v Jordan 1956
• what occurred in R v Smith?

  -soldiers fighting in barracks V stabbed in lung through back with bayonet

  -doctors failed to give appropriate treatment (artificial air)

  -v died 2 hours after

  -said poor treatment affected chance of survival by 75%

  -Smith charged as injuries already life threatening from beginning
• what occurred in R v Cheshire?

  -V shot in stomach

  -V had tracheotomy

  -6-8 weeks later V died from implications from tracheotomy (original wounds had healed)

  -D still liable for death of V
• what was established from R v Cheshire?

  as long as D's act contributed significantly to someone's death, D can be held responsible
• what was established from R v Smith?

  medical treatment is unlikely to break chain of causation because D's actions cause V to require medical treatment
• what occurred in R v Jordan?

  -V stabbed & given antibiotic a week later, had allergic reaction

  -following day doctor gave same antibiotic to V and V died

  -CA found doctor liable

  -palpably wrong (CA)
• does the chain of causation break if V is classed as "brain dead"

  no - V is legally dead
• give the case example linking to life support machines

  R v Malcherek & Steel 1981 CA
• what occurred in R v Malcherek & Steel?

  -Malcherek stabbed wife x9

  -she was tested on & was "brain dead"

  -doctors wanted to turn off life support & this was approved

  -Steel attacked V

  -tests confirmed she had legally "died"

  -life support turned off
• give the case example for voluntary action of the victim

  R v Kennedy 2007
• what occurred in R v Kennedy 2007?

  -D prepared syringe of heroin

  -V self-injected

  -V died

  -D NOT GUILTY as V action's voluntary