causation essay

Question 1

Should we have a general duty to rescue? What are the two solutions to this

Answer 1

1) recognise a new omissions based duty where failure to perform easy rescue
2) build upon CL duties to create a citizenships duty which mandates reasonable action where D is in a position to benefit the citizen

Question 2

Current conventional view

Answer 2

Glanville Williams: the role of the law is to repress active wrong doings and bring the lethargic unto scratch

Question 3

What is the social responsibility view

Answer 3

Ashworth tast tehr should at least be a duty to save those imperil hedged with conditions so that it is not too onerous or dangerous

Question 4

What is the argument against a general duty

Answer 4

Retsriciton of autonomy

Question 5

What does Ashworth argue about the autonomy argument

Answer 5

that it is misplaced and misunderstood, so while it would restrict autonomy more the act based liability, it would only arise in very limited circumstances where V is in considerable danger and there would eb a very low expectation of D

Question 6

Would a general duty be more clear

Answer 6

Current common law duties can be difficult to where they end and begin, breaching Art 7 certainty, would a general duty be more clear, fair warning that liability will be imposed where D unreasonably fails to act

Question 7

Why is factual causation problematic

Answer 7

Dalloway- but the need for a more stringent test is satisfied through legal causation

Question 8

Medical negligence issues

Answer 8

V is subject to medical mistreatment is it harsh?

Question 9

Cases for medical mistreatment

Answer 9

R v Smith emergency justified even though it would have been better if D had been left without treatment
R v Cheshire: non-emergency
R v Jordan but restricted by Cheshire and Smith

Question 10

What can be argued has happened with medical negligence

Answer 10

the chain of causation has become overstretched to secure a condition of who we think is morally to blame

Question 11

Is the medical approach necessary

Answer 11

probably due to high social value

Question 12

Subsequent conduct

Answer 12

vol/foreseeabilty

Question 13

Vol/foreseeabilty cases

Answer 13

R v Roberts: where voluntary and unforeseeable would not break that chain (although unlike to be daft)
R v kennedy: where the action is voluntary despite being foreseeable
R v Blaue: unforeseeable and voluntary

Question 14

Issue with Blue

Answer 14

wide application of Blaue to Holland, if this will suffice what else will> Although Hart and Honore argue since medical advances

Question 15

Issues with empress Car Co

Answer 15

Where a vol and unforeseeable act did not break. Explained by Kennedy precedent was contained to pollution cases due toPP. However allowing shows the willingness to the erosion of principles Smith and Hogan

Question 16

Are the current rules satisfactory

Answer 16

no legal individualism which require purposive policy readings and decisions are made in individual cases, lead to case law that is unsuitable, and irrational- Norrie

Question 17

What did the draft criminal code suggest

Answer 17

D should not be relieved of responsibility unless something occurred that was unforeseen, unforeseeable and sufficient in itself to cause the result (Cl.17(2))

Question 18

Why would the criminal code need modification in light of Kennedy

Answer 18

where the reason for relieving D of responsibility is, in principle, linked to the voluntary nature of the drug-taker’s action rather than to any lack of foreseeability that he might do it.

Question 19

Suggestion from Hart and Honore what may be a suitable alternative

Answer 19

Distinction between normal causation conditions and abnormal causation conditions. However too vague and subjective too achieve the objectifying role intended