• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Rules of Causation Case. Jess throws paint in Sams eyes. Sam had to go to hospital to have paint removed from his eyes. On the way home, just before his sight was fully recovered, he tripped on the kerb and fractured his skull.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Jess throws paint in Sam's eyes. Sam had to go to hospital to have paint removed from his eyes. On the way home, just before his sight was fully recovered, he tripped on the kerb and fractured his skull. - Outline the rules of causation and briefly discuss whether Jess caused Sam's fractured skull (7 marks) Once it has been established that the defendant performed the act, the prosecution must prove that it was the defendant's conduct which caused those consequences to occur. The prosecution has to show that the defendant's conduct was the factual cause of that consequence, the defendant's conduct was in law the cause of that consequence and there was no intervening act which broke the chain of causation. ...read more.

Middle

Held defendant was substantial and operating cause of death as the victim died from blood loss as a result of the stab wound. This relates to the scenario because Jess is the operating and substantial cause of Sam's injuries, he sustained his injuries because of Jess' actions. Novus actus interveniens (new intervening act), this is where the chain of causation is broken and the defendant is no longer guilty. There are only three ways in which the chain of causation can be broken, this is by the act of a third party, the victim's own act and a natural but unpredictable event. An example of the act of a third party is, R v Jordan, the defendant stabbed the victim who was taken to hospital. ...read more.

Conclusion

The thin skull rule is that you must take your victim as you find them. An example of this is, R v Blaue, the defendant stabbed a Jehovah's Witness who was told in hospital she would die if she didn't have a blood transfusion, on religious grounds she refused and died. Held the stab wound was still the substantial and operating cause due to the thin skull rule. This relates to the scenario because Sam tripped on the kerb due to the substantial and operating cause of having paint in his eyes. Jess did cause Sam's fractured skull. But for her actions of throwing paint in his eyes, he would not have tripped on the kerb. The substantial and operating cause for Sam tripping on the kerb was his partial sight caused by Jess throwing paint in his eyes. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Criminal Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

5 star(s)

This is a good answer. It briefly but accurately outlines each of the rules of causation and supports each rule with relevant case authority. Each rule is accurately applied to the facts of the scenario.
It may be unnecessary to include the last two points of novus actus as they are not relevant to the scenario. Try to select relevant material, especially in a time limited situation.
Rating *****

Marked by teacher Nick Price 22/03/2012

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Criminal Law essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    English law does not normally impose liability for an omission or failure to act ...

    4 star(s)

    He lived with his housekeeper and mistress of 8 years, Gwendolyn Dobinson aged 43 who was described as ineffectual and inadequate. Ted's sister Fanny came to live with them. She had previously lived with another sister but had fallen out with her.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Is the current law on the non-fatal offences against the person satisfactory?

    4 star(s)

    A higher level of mens rea would be necessary than for the current legislation, where the defendant need only foresee some harm in order to be convicted of GBH (Mowatt), and he need not foresee the consequences required for the actus reus of the offence of ABH (Roberts).

  1. Human Trafficking In Australia. This essay will be covering different aspect of human ...

    In 1999 Australia introduced the first of sexual slavery laws with the Criminal Code (Slavery and sexual servitude) amendment act 1999 (cth). This further refined and added more human trafficking offences to the Federal Criminal Code in the Criminal amendment (Trafficking in persons offences)

  2. The rules and principles of causation not only provide fair practical solutions to the ...

    In the case of R V Kimsey 1996, the defendant was involved in a car crash as a result of a high speed chase. It was decided the defendants driving did not have to be a substantial cause of the other driver's death because the court could be sure that it was a cause that was something more than slight.

  1. The justifiable use of force in self-defence depends entirely upon the circumstances in which ...

    Whether or not preparing to an attack to defend, even when it involves breaches of the law, was a question arisen in Attorney-General's Reference (No.2 of 1983).The defendant's shop had been attacked and damaged by rioters, so fearing further attacks he made petrol bombs.

  2. Discuss whether trial by jury should be retained or abolished.

    and lead to a higher amount of acquittals when tried by a jury. This is in accordance to statistics stating that in the Crown Court, 40% of people are acquitted, in contrast to 25% people acquitted in the magistrates court where there is no jury.

  1. Explain the meaning of Actus reus and mens rea

    For example Hill v West Yorkshire police where it was held that the police owe a duty to the general public and not specific individuals. Explain the meaning of breach of duty Lord Alderson in Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks described negligence as doing something the reasonable man would not do

  2. Explain what is meant by the term causation in criminal law and assess how ...

    If it is found that the act did not make more than a minimal contribution to the death it will be ignored under what is called the de minimis principle. Contributory cases- the defendant?s acts need not be the sole cause or even the main cause of death, it being sufficient that it was a cause (Pagett).

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work