Causation Info A2 Law G153

HideShow resource information
  • Created by: Nadine
  • Created on: 03-06-14 20:52
Preview of Causation Info A2 Law G153

First 293 words of the document:

Nadine Allen
Actus Reus
For D to be charged with a criminal act it must be established that D caused the
end result. This is an essential part of the crime as if it can't be established then D
can't be guilty of the crime.
Causation is present in every crime
If the D can prove that something else broke the chain of causation then he won't
be liable for the crime.
The prosecution must prove that beyond reasonable doubt that D caused the end
result and there was no break in the chain of causation
Role of Judge and Jury
Judge will sum up the case and direct the jury. Jury will decide the verdict and
judge sentences. Causation is a matter for the jury
Where does the law on causation come from?
It comes from common law (case law, judge made law). This means it's flexible
and judges can adapt the law quicker than parliament. But flexibility also mean
uncertainty and judges aren't elected so it's undemocratic.
Courts created the but for test ­ meaning but for the actions of the D the end
result would not have happened and in other words if the actions of D made no
difference to the end result D isn't liable
D put cyanide into his mother's drink intending to kill her but she died before she
could drink it. D wasn't the factual cause of her death so wasn't guilty of murder
but was found guilty of attempted murder. NO FACTUAL CAUSATION

Other pages in this set

Page 2

Preview of page 2

Here's a taster:

Nadine Allen
D took his pregnant girlfriend from her home and held her hostage. Police arrived
and called for him to surrender, he came out of the house using his girlfriend as a
human shield and began firing at the police. The police fired back and the girlfriend
was shot and killed by the police. D was convicted of manslaughter. Although he
didn't directly kill her but for his actions she wouldn't have died.…read more

Page 3

Preview of page 3

Here's a taster:

Nadine Allen
D did start the chain of events so should be responsible. BUT is it unfair to
convict D for the end result if the end result was totally unforeseeable?
D was guilty of manslaughter ­ it's foreseeable that if you shoot at the police they
will shoot back.…read more

Page 4

Preview of page 4

Here's a taster:

Nadine Allen
Doctors switching off life support machine doesn't break the chain. Stab wound
was "an operating and substantial cause of death"
A young girl screamed loudly whilst she was being assaulted by D. she was holing a
baby at the time and the baby got so scared it had a fit and then died 4 weeks
later.…read more

Page 5

Preview of page 5

Here's a taster:

Nadine Allen
death the jury were entitled to convict D. V also sort of committed suicide, they
wounds were the cause of the death.
F - The medical treatment given is inadequate
Sometimes doctors can make mistakes with medical treatment. The courts
recognise this and are reluctant to let a medical mistake break the chain of
causation because it would mean the D escapes liability. The D would have started
the chain.
V had been stabbed and was healing well in hospital.…read more

Page 6

Preview of page 6

Here's a taster:

Nadine Allen
Jordon hasn't been overruled and could be followed again
The courts don't like the decision of Jordan and have chosen to distinguish
against to so they don't have follow it.…read more


No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all resources »