Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Causation (AR)
Causation (AR)
Legal Causation
the courts try to look at the first instance of the crime, and the end results, and everything that happens in between as a 'chain of events'
if something happens in between D's initial act and the end result that is more than trifling, the chain will be broken
-
Actions of the victim
-
if the victims actions are thought to be 'daft' then they will be seen to break the chain of causation
-
-
in regard to drugs, it depends on who distributed the dosage
-
:red_flag: Dalby: both self injected, chain broken
-
Thin Skull Rule
-
if the victim has something unusual about their physical or mental state which makes an injury more serious, D remains liable for the full extent of the injury
-
Factual Causation
-
However, factual causation alone is not enough for liability
-
Pros/Cons of Causation
the thin skull rule
Pros: prevents people from getting away with a more serious crime, brings justice for the victim and family, serves a purpose
Cons: the defendant may not have known there was a problem so the act may not have been intended to be more serious
negligent doctors
Pros: protects doctors as they do work in a high pressure environment and people will not want to be doctors if they are constanly made liable
-