Actus Reus - Causation Part 2
Part two for the actus reus mindmap.
- Created by: Domingo
- Created on: 16-04-13 18:58
View mindmap
- Actus Reus - Causation
- Actions of a Third Party
- Medical treatment
- Negligent medical treatment is unlikely to break the chain of events unless it is so in itself so potent in causing death that D's actions are insignificant.
- From Smith (1959)
- Malcherek (1981)
- Life support machine turned off by doctors.
- Cheshire (1991)
- The defendant shot a man in the stomach and thigh. The man was taken to hospital where he was operated on and developed breathing difficulties.
- He continued to have breathing difficulty and died from complications arising from a tracheotomy
- The defendant was convicted of murder and appealed. Did not break the chain of causation since the defendant had shot the victim and this could not be regarded as insignificant.
- He continued to have breathing difficulty and died from complications arising from a tracheotomy
- The defendant shot a man in the stomach and thigh. The man was taken to hospital where he was operated on and developed breathing difficulties.
- Jordan (1956)
- -Only case where poor medical treatment DID break chain of causation.
- -Medical treatment was "Palpably wrong"
- -Only case where poor medical treatment DID break chain of causation.
- Negligent medical treatment is unlikely to break the chain of events unless it is so in itself so potent in causing death that D's actions are insignificant.
- Smith (1959)
- A soldier got in a fight at an army barracks and stabbed another soldier.
- Victim dropped
- At the medical center the treatment was poor.
- Affected chances of survival by 75% - died
- Still did NOT count as intervening act.
- Affected chances of survival by 75% - died
- A soldier got in a fight at an army barracks and stabbed another soldier.
- Medical treatment
- Intervening Acts
- Test comes from Smith (1959)
- Intervening act must be :
- A) Sufficiently independent of D's conduct.
- Intervening act must be :
- Test comes from Smith (1959)
- Thin Skull Test
- D must take victim as he finds them
- Pre-Existing medical condition can not be used to escape liability
- If victim refuses medical treatment on religious grounds then D still liable
- Blaine (1975)
- Stab victim refused a blood transfusion on religious grounds
- C of A - upheld conviction - death due to stabbing not refusal of blood.
- Stab victim refused a blood transfusion on religious grounds
- Blaine (1975)
- Actions of a Third Party
Comments
No comments have yet been made