Causation Flashcards
What is causation
In crimes requiring proof of an outcome such as damage/destruction causation must be shown
The rules of causation determine whether D’s conduct is a sufficient and legally operative cause of V’s death
Where can issues with causation arise
establishing where AR begins and ends e.g. R v Miller- how much is relevant to the conduct of D? CDA offers no definition of damage, so it is unto the court to decide the threshold where criminal liability begins and ends
How can it be said that the rules of causation have been developed
piecemeal not systematically, resulting in different language being used in different cases
How can the meaning of causation be decribed
heavily content specific meaning that Parl and or courts can apply the rules of causation in different ways per Lord Hughes in Hughes
How important is policy in causation?
it appears important but it is not always articulated as so
What must first be shown to establish causation
That D’s act must be the factual but for cause of the consequence
In which case was factual causation not established
R v White- but for D poisoning his mother, she would still have died therefore causation could not have been shown- still found guilty of attempted murder
Which case shows the problems of factual causation
R v Dalloway, D was driving a horse and cart without holding onto the reins. A small child ran into the road and was killed. D was charged with MS but was acquitted. Although the child was killed by D’s cart which was being driven negligently, the death would have happened anyway in exactly the same way.
Why is Dalloway so problematic
By asking the but for test alone, you can establish factual causation. However, this would not mean that the driver was necessarily responsible or to blame for the child’s death because even if he had been holding onto the reigns there would have been nothing he could have done.
Since factual causation alone is not enough what is needed?
Because factual causation alone would lead to convictions when D is not necessarily to blame, a more stringent test also needs to be satisfied.
What is the second thing that must be shown
That D must make a more than minimal contribution
In which case was it held that it need not be the principle cause
‘It need not be the only or the principal cause. It must, however, be a cause which is more than de minimis, more than minimal’ R v Hennigan
What is legal causation more closely associated with
moral responsibility
What was held in Kimsey
: D was involved in a high-speed car chase and lost control of the car and the other driver was killed- t must be shown that the D’s conduct was clearly more than just a minimal or trifling cause i.e. it must be substantial
What happened in the case of Hughes
the charge was causing death by driving without licence or insurance. D’s driving at the time was faultless. The wording of the offence was said to import common law rule of legal causation and that this includes a requirement that there is something properly to be criticised in the driving of the D, which contributed in some more than minimal way to the death.
where was Hughes approved
Hughes was approved by the SC in Taylor, where the relevant aggravation was alleged to be that owing to the driving of the taken vehicle, an accident occurred by which injury was caused to any person. It was accepted that D’s driving was without fault. It was hled that it would be a ‘remarkable extension’ of strict liability to make D laible for injury or damage that he could not have prevented. Such an extension would require ‘clear language’ in the Theft Act, which was not present.
Can d escape liability where there is more than one cause in law?
D cannot eescape merley by indentfying someone else who is also to blame (Benge)
What happened in the case of Benge?
: D was the foreman of a group of railway workers, who failed to follow safety procedures to protect the men working on the railway line. Two were killed by a train. He argued that the train driver was at fault for not keeping a proper look out. But even if this was true, this does not excuse the D, his failure was one of a number of causes of the workmen’s death
when will an indirect cause be sufficient
where it is legally sufficient and operative- McKechnie- ‘was the omission to operate, which was a cause of death… in turn a consequence of D’s actions in inflicting the head injuries upon V?’
What was held in Dyson
D injured a child who was suffering from a terminal illness. He was held to be guilty for the death. The proper question to have been submitted to the jury was whether the prisoner accelerated the child’s death by the injuries which he inflicted.
What would be the approach taken to giving someone a plain killing drug that as a side effect reduced life
the use of a pain killing drug to treat the terminally ill may as a side effect accelerate death without triggering criminal liability provided that the doctor does not directly intend to kill. However, it is probably better to recognise a defence of clinical necessity in this situation.
What is an omission
D omits to do an act he is under a duty to do and which might prevent the occurrence of the result.
Is there a general duty to act
no despite the fact there is a duty of rescue in other jurisdictions
Where do duties stem from
There are statutory duties and common law duties.
Why can it be said that common law duties are probematic
The common law duty can be problematic in the way these duties are declared. This is a developing area of law. Ashworth argues that this threatens the principle of certainty in Art 7. It would be preferable to define and make all duties statutory so people know where liability begins and ends.
example of statutory duty in regards to terrorism
Failure to disclose to the police information that another person has committed certain terrorist offense is an offence under s.19 Terrorism Act.
Statutory duty under the domestic violence, crime and victims act
Domestic Violence, Crime & Victims Act s.5 creates an offence of allowing/causing the death or serious injury to a child or vulnerable adult, which includes failing to take reasonable steps to prevent such harm.
What is a special relationship
- There is very little authority from the courts on what a special relationship is.
- A parent has a DoC for his child- Gibbins v Proctor.
- Parental responsibility has since become statutory in the Children and Young Persons Act.
- Husband and wives owe each other a DoC- Smith
Where would a contractual duty arise
- This could arise in contracts for medical staff, members of emergency services, lifeguards etc.
- The duty is owed to anyone who may be affected, not just the other parties to the contract.
case for contractual duty of care
R v Pittwood, a man employed to operate the level crossing, omitted to close the gate. A vehicle passing was subsequently hit by a train. The driver was killed. D was convicted of manslaughter. The court rejected the argument that D simply owed a duty to the railway company.
where is a duty owed where there has been a relationship or undertaking
A duty is owed by anyone who voluntarily undertakes to care for another whether through age, infirmity or illness etc. The duty will be imposed where V has relied upon D and then latter failed to help
