Chapter 3

Question 1

Factual causation/causation in fact

Answer 1

concerned with inquiry about how the victim died with contribution of the accused

Question 2

Legal causation/causation in law

Answer 2

concerned with whether the accused should be responsible for the death that occurred

Question 3

Foreseeability

Answer 3

If the consequences of the accused person’s actions are foreseeable, there is a causal link between the consequences and the person’s actions

Question 4

Palliative care

Answer 4

Drug or medical treatment that relieves pain without curing the condition

Question 5

Active euthanasia

Answer 5

Intentional use of a painless method of death to end a person’s pain and suffering

Question 6

Passive euthanasia

Answer 6

Withdrawing medical treatment to accelerate one’s death from a pre-existing medical condition

Question 7

Medically assistance in dying (MAID)

Answer 7

Physicians and nurses are able to engage in active euthanasia or medically assisted suicide if the person’s natural death is inevitabel

Question 8

Assisted Suicide

Answer 8

When an individual assists another person to commit suicide

Question 9

Physician-assisted suicide

Answer 9

When a physician assists a person to commit suicide

Question 10

First degree murder

Answer 10

Deliberate and planned homicide

Question 11

Substantial and integral cause

Answer 11

Test of causation strictly applied to first degree murder

Question 12

What are the general rules of causation?

Answer 12

1. Actus reus includes a consequence
2. Crown must show that the accused caused the consequences
3. Mens rea is foreseeability

Question 13

Intervening act

Answer 13

An intervening act can disrupt the chain of causation between the defendant’s wounding and the victim’s death

Question 14

Improper medical treatment

Answer 14

Improper medical treatment not performed in good faith can disrupt the chain of causation between the defendant’s wounding and the victim’s death

Question 15

When is a person considered legally dead?

Answer 15

When an irreversible cessation of the person’s brain functions have occurred

Question 16

Smither’s test

Answer 16

Test to inquire if the accused’s conduct constituted a “contributing cause outside the de minimis range”

Question 17

Nette Test

Answer 17

Test to inquire if the accused’s conduct constituted a “significant contributing cause”

Question 18

What are the 3 types of foreseeability?

Answer 18

Intention, recklessness, negligence

Question 19

Intention (foreseeability)

Answer 19

Accused foresaw the consequences

Question 20

Recklessness (foreseeability)

Answer 20

Accused foresaw that their was a risk that consequences may occur

Question 21

Negligence (foreseeability)

Answer 21

Accused did not foresee the consequences or risks, but a reasonable person in the same situation would have

Question 22

Contributing cause outside of de minimis range

Answer 22

Shown to have had more than a minimal impact on the events leading up to the victim’s death

Question 23

What must be established to prove factual causation

Answer 23

“but for” the accused’s conduct, the consequences would have never occurred

Question 24

Harbottle Test

Answer 24

Test to determine whether the accused’s conduct was a substantial and integral cause for death

Question 25

When is the Harbottle Test used?

Answer 25

After factual causation is established and only applies to first degree murder