Causation Flashcards
General elements of liability
R v White (1910) - important
If the consequence would have happened anyway ‘but for’ Ds actions, then there is no factual causation and D is not liable.
R v Kimsey (2016) - important
To establish legal causation, there has to be more than a ‘slight or trifling link’ between Ds actions and the prohibited consequence.
R v Blaue (1975) - important
D must take their victim as they find them. IF V has a pre-existing condition, (religious belief in refusing a blood transfusion) that makes the situation more dangerous than it would normally be, D is still liable for the consequence. “Thin skull Rule”
R v Smith (1959) - important
Treatment that did not break the chain of causation includes dropping a stretcher and wrongly giving CPR in a way that made V’s death much more likely.
R v Latif (1996) - important
The act of a third party will break the chain of causation if its “free, deliberate and informed” and causes the prohibited consequence.
R v Roberts (1971) - important
A foreseeable reaction by the victim does not break the chain of causation, e.g. when V jumped from a moving car to escape a sexual assault.
R v Williams and Davis (1992) - important
An unforeseeable reaction by the victim breaks the chain of causation, eg when v jumped from a moving car because he thought his wallet was getting stolen.
R v Pagett (1983)
If the consequence wouldn’t have happened ‘but for’ D’s actions, then there is factual causation and D can be liable.
R v Pagett (1983)
If D’s actions lead to a foreseeable reaction by a third party that causes them harm, this reaction doesn’t break the chain of causation and D is still liable.
R v Hughes (2013)
When D’s driving was faultless, D not having a license to drive is an example of a ‘minimal cause’ of Vs death, Which is not enough to create criminal liability.
R v Cheshire (1991)
Poor medical treatment does not usually break the chain of causation, even if it is below the standard of a ‘competent medical practitioner’.
R v Wallace (2018)
If the risk of harm from a third part was foreseeable, it doesn’t matter if the precise manner of the eventual harm was unpredictable. This doesn’t remove D’s liability
R v Muhammad (2021)
If the risk of harm from a third part was foreseeable, it doesn’t matter if the precise manner of the eventual harm was unpredictable. This doesn’t remove D’s liability
R v Jordan (1956)
Medical treatment that does break the chain of causation includes prescribing an antibiotic that the Doctor knew the victim was allergic to.
R v Malcharek (1981)
Doctors switching off life support doesn’t break the chain of causation
