Causation
Factual Causation
This asks whether ‘but for’ the defendant's conduct would the consequence have occurred as and when it did.
If it would have happened anyway the D will not be the factual cause of it.
R v White
Because the D's mother died from a heart attack, his attempt to poison her was not the factual cause of her death. She would have died anyway.
Legal Causation
1) De Minimis Principle
D doesn’t necessarily have to be the sole cause or even the main cause of the consequence, but he must make more than a minimal contribution, more than a ‘slight or trifling’ contribution
R v Kimsey
K, the defendant and Osborne (the victim) were involved in a high speed car chase when O lost control of her car and was killed.
- A natural but unpredictable event
2) Intervening acts
- Acts of a Third Party.
The D shot the victim in the stomach, the V went to hospital, he had had an emergency tracheotomy (tube inserted into the windpipe) to help him breath, led to rare complications and the V died.
D still cause of the Vs death as the complication was connected with the original injury.
Cheshire
Acts of a third person/party will only break the chain if they overtake and overwhelm the acts of the defendant and render them insignificant.
- Acts of the Victim
The V was stabbed twice by another soldier with a bayonet, dropped off a stretcher. He received ‘thoroughly bad’ medical treatment (unaware of injuries)
The D remained the cause of death as the original injury was still operating at the time.
Smith
Jordan
Jordan stabbed the victim, taken to hospital 8 days later, given antibiotics even though he was allergic to them. He died of pneumonia, but his wounds were healing. The treatment was described as ‘palpaby wrong’.
The victim died of the medical treatment and not the stab wound.
Roberts
V who had accepted a lift from D jumped from his car whilst it was travelling at around 30 mph. As he was trying to sexually assault her at the time this didn’t break the chain of causation.
Williams and Davies
The D’s picked up a hitchhiker on the way to Glastonbury festival, jumped out of the car at 30 mph, hit his head and died. The prosecution alleged that the defendants were in the course of robbing him but as the victim had died, it was difficult to prove this.
Dear
The D went after a man who had sexually assaulted his daughter, he repeatedly slashed him with a Stanley knife.
The victim received medical treatment but later re-opened his wounds in what was thought to be a suicide attempt and he died two days after the initial attack.
The D was in a fight resulting in a deep cut to the V’s finger. V failed to take care of the wound or get medical assistance and it became infected, gangrene set in and the victim was advised to have his arm amputated. The victim refused and died.
Holland
Unforeseeable natural events can break the chain of causation.
An intervening act can break the chain of causation:
- Acts of a third party
- Acts of the victim.
- A natural but unpredictable event.
3) The Thin Skull Rule
This rule means that the D must take the V as he finds them. Even if the V is more vulnerable to harm due to a pre-existing condition the D will be responsible for the full extent of the harm. This includes the ‘whole’ man so it can include physical and psychological conditions and religious beliefs.
Blaue
The V, a Jehovah’s Witness refused a blood transfusion which could have saved her life due to her religious beliefs. D remained responsible for her death.