Causation

Question 1

What are the two causation tests?

Answer 1

(1) factual causation

(2) legal causation

Question 2

Which case establishes that factual causation is determined by the but for test? What were the facts?

Answer 2

White [1910]

Tried to poison mother’s drink, but she died of natural causes before taking drink. No factual causation.

Question 3

What is the Hughes [2013] test of legal causation?

Answer 3

That act or omission contributes in some more than minimal way.

Question 4

Which case established that for legal causation, D’s act does not have to be the medical or sole cause of death? What were the facts?

Answer 4

McKechnie (1992)
D broke into V’s house and hit over head with TV. Severe head injuries caused doctors inability to operate on stomach ulcer which actually caused death. D liable for manslaughter.

Question 5

What are the three categories of novus actus interveniens?

Answer 5

(1) natural disasters
(2) acts of third parties
(3) acts of the victim

Question 6

What test do you apply to naturally occurring events to establish a break in the chain of causation?

Answer 6

Foreseeability test

Question 7

Which case said that “a free, deliberate and informed act by a third party breaks the chain of causation”?

Answer 7

R v Latif [1996]

Question 8

In which case were the injuries caused by the other Ds so completely different that they constituted a break in the chain of causation?

Answer 8

Rafferty [2007]

Question 9

In which case were the actions of the police in firing in retaliation involuntary and so did not break the chain of causation? What were the facts?

Answer 9

Pagett (1983)
D resisting arrest and used pregnant gf as shield while fired on police. Police returned fire and killed girl in process. D was legal cause of death.

Question 10

In which case did the court determine that for assessing whether the act of a third party broke the chain of causation, the test was whether the original wound inflicted by D was still an operating and substantial cause of death?

Answer 10

Smith [1959]

Question 11

In which case was it held that D’s acts need only to “contribute significantly to cause of death” to remain liable after third party medical intervention?

Answer 11

Cheshire [1991]

Question 12

In which exceptional case, did medical treatment described as “palpably wrong” break the chain of causation? What were the facts?

Answer 12

Jordan (1956)

Put back on antibiotics that taken off as allergic to caused death.

Question 13

In which case did the CA assert that the test for assessing whether the acts of the V broke the chain of causation was whether they were “reasonably foreseeable”, and suggest that it would be broken “where V’s actions were so daft as to be unforeseeable”?

Answer 13

Roberts (1972)

Question 14

In which case was it held that where V takes a voluntary and informed decision to take drugs it will break the chain of causation?

Answer 14

Kennedy (No 2)

Question 15

Which case established that a D must take V as he finds them in psychological make-up and beliefs when assessing reasonable foreseeability of acts of V to break causation chain? Facts of the case?

Answer 15

Blaue (1975)

Held to be reasonably foreseeable that a Jehovah’s Witness would refuse blood transfusion.

Question 16

Which case about a nervous disposition, held that the question when assessing acts of the V for causation is ‘whether V’s act was within a range of responses which might be expected from a V placed in the situation in which he was, bearing in mind any particular characteristic of V’? Case facts?

Answer 16

Williams and Davis [1992]

V died after jumping out of moving car when Ds tried to rob him.