Test

Question 1

Factual causation

Answer 1

• applies ‘but for test’
• but for Ds conduct, would consequence have occurred
• pagett: v would not have died but for D using her as a shield in shoot out

Question 2

Legal causation

Answer 2

Ds conduct more than minimal cause of consequence
Others may contribute to consequence
Benge: d still a legal cause of deaths as his conduct more than a minimal cause

Question 3

Medical negligence

Answer 3

Unlikely to break chain of causation unless it is so independent of Ds act and in itself so potent in causing death that Ds act is insignificant

Cheshire: medical complications were direct consequence of shooting + Ds act still a significant cause of Vs death

Question 4

Vs own conduct

Answer 4

Unlikely to break chain of causation unless it is so daft that a reasonable person wouldn’t have foreseen v reacting in that way

Roberts: D held to be liable for Vs injuries as her reaction was reasonably foreseeable

Question 5

Thin skull rule

Answer 5

If v has something unusual about them that makes them more vulnerable, COC won’t be broken
-eg religious beliefs
-d must take V as he finds him
-thin skull
BLAUE: had to take victim as he found her

Question 6

Mens rea

Answer 6

• mental element of an offence: guilty mind
• each offence has its own mens rea
• prosecution must prove D had relevant mens rea for offence charged

Question 7

Direct intent

Answer 7

D directly desires result that occurs and sets out to achieve it, result is his aim/purpose

Mohan: D deliberately punches V, directly intends to use unlawful force on V

Question 8

Indirect intent

Answer 8

Result is not desired but was virtually certain to occur and D knows this

Woollin:

• trial judge misdirected jury on law
• HL held on appeal that D should be guilty of manslaughter
• trial judge should’ve made it clear that D must know undesired result virtually certain to occur- jury may find D indirectly intended death to occur

Question 9

Recklessness

Answer 9

Where D knows there was a risk of result happening but takes that risk

Cunningham: d not liable, didn’t know there was a risk of gas escaping into Vs house- not intended to cause harm nor had he taken a risk he knew about