2. Actus Reus (Causation)

Question 1

What is the Actus Reus of Murder?

Answer 1

Unlawfully killing a reasonable person who is in being under the King’s peace.

Question 2

Name and explain the 2 elements of Causation:

Answer 2

Factual Causation: the ‘but for’ test. But for the acts (or omissions) of the accused the prohibited result would not have occured.
Legal Causation: Defendants act must be Operating and Substantial cause of the prohibited consequence.

Question 3

In Escape cases what test must be satisfied for there to be a break in the chain of causation? Which Cases contain these decisions?

Answer 3

R v Roberts: Has the V done something so daft or unexpected that the reasonable man could not be expected to foresee it?
R v Williams and Davies: Was the V actions within the range of responses from a V in that situation, Include V’s Characteristics and that in “agony of moment, may act without thought and deliberation”

Question 4

Set out the test required to determine Factual Causation:

Answer 4

The ‘but for’ test. R v White, ‘but for’ the defendants actions would the prohibitive harm have occured?

Question 5

Set out the test to determine Legal Causation:

Answer 5

Is the D the “Operating and Substantial cause of the prohibitive harm?” (Cheshire, Pagett).

Question 6

Which case defines the term ‘substantial’ in the legal causation test? What does it mean?

Answer 6

R v Kimsey: More than slight or trifiling.

Question 7

Which case defines the term ‘substantial’ in the legal causation test? What does it mean?

Answer 7

R v Kimsey: More than slight or trifiling.