Causation

Question 1

Causation:

Answer 1

Rules of causation are applied to decide whether the def’s act caused victim’s harm.

Question 2

Factual Causation:

Answer 2

The ‘But For’ Test: the def can only be guilty if the consequence would not have happened but for his act.
Failed in R v White: intended to kill mother but died of natural causes so not liable.
Succeeded in R v Pagett: but for def using girlfriend as human shield she would not have died.

Question 3

Legal Causation:

Answer 3

The link between the act and consequence - known as the chain of causation.
R v Jordan: medical negligence was palpably wrong.
R v Smith: medical treatment was not palpably wrong so original act was operating cause.
R v Cheshire: def was liable as actual cause of death was not seen as independent of original act.

Question 4

Novus Actus Interveniens:

Answer 4

A break in the chain of causation.

Question 5

Thin Skull Rule:

Answer 5

You must take your victim as you find him, doesn’t matter if def was unaware of a vulnerable characteristic. R v Blaue: victim’s religious beliefs led to refusal of life saving treatment, def still liable.

Question 6

Victim’s Own Act:

Answer 6

If a victim’s act is reasonable, it will not break the chain of causation and constitute a novus actus interveniens.
R v Roberts: victim’s own act was reasonable.
R v Williams: victim’s own act was unreasonable so broke the chain of causation.