Causation in Murder
Two types on causation that need to be considered in all result crimes.
1. Factual causation – the ‘but for’ test (R v White 1910). Are they factually the cwuse
of death?
2. Legal causation – the ‘significant and operative’ cause test (R v Cheshire 1991 –
‘tracheotomy’)
Where D causes another to act: R v Pagett 1983, formed relationship with 16 y/o but she
ended the relationship as he was violent. He then drove to parent’s house with a shotgun
and drove off with gf and her mother. He kicked mother out the car and held gf hostage.
Armed police went to scene and D fired shots at police. Police returned fire and gf got shot
as D was using her as a human shield. D would argue there’s no causation, but courts
disagreed as he was both factual and legal cause.
V need not act sensibly or take extra care of himself.
R v Roberts 1971 – V opens door to moving vehicle when D makes unwanted sexual
advances on her. D argues no legal causation. Are the actions of the victim so daft that the
reasonable person could’ve expected them? Even though D may argue that he wasn’t going
to act, clearly this isn’t an unforeseeable action.
R v Williams and Davis 1992 – V was robbed in a vehicle, jumped out and died.
R v Corbett 1996
R v Marjoram 2000 – D attempts to break into a girl’s hostel room, to which she jumps out
of the window falling 47 feet to the ground. Court argues this was reasonably foreseeable to
the average person.
Free, voluntary, and informed choice
R v Kennedy No.2 2007 – D passes needle filled with heroin to V. D appeals and his
conviction. Is quashed as no pressure from D, breaks chain of causation.
Vulnerabilities – you must take your victim as you find them (the eggshell skull rule).
R v Hayward 1908 – D is chasing V but during the pursuit she collapses and dies from a heart
attack. She had a rare thyroid issue, because she was frightened it caused her to have a
heart attack. However, nobody was aware of this, he was still the cause of her death.
R v Blaue 1975 – V had been stabbed, they were Jehovah witness and refused a blood
transfusion and dies. There was good chance of living if transfusion had taken place. Court
decided this didn’t break chain of causation, you have to take victim as you find them.
Two types on causation that need to be considered in all result crimes.
1. Factual causation – the ‘but for’ test (R v White 1910). Are they factually the cwuse
of death?
2. Legal causation – the ‘significant and operative’ cause test (R v Cheshire 1991 –
‘tracheotomy’)
Where D causes another to act: R v Pagett 1983, formed relationship with 16 y/o but she
ended the relationship as he was violent. He then drove to parent’s house with a shotgun
and drove off with gf and her mother. He kicked mother out the car and held gf hostage.
Armed police went to scene and D fired shots at police. Police returned fire and gf got shot
as D was using her as a human shield. D would argue there’s no causation, but courts
disagreed as he was both factual and legal cause.
V need not act sensibly or take extra care of himself.
R v Roberts 1971 – V opens door to moving vehicle when D makes unwanted sexual
advances on her. D argues no legal causation. Are the actions of the victim so daft that the
reasonable person could’ve expected them? Even though D may argue that he wasn’t going
to act, clearly this isn’t an unforeseeable action.
R v Williams and Davis 1992 – V was robbed in a vehicle, jumped out and died.
R v Corbett 1996
R v Marjoram 2000 – D attempts to break into a girl’s hostel room, to which she jumps out
of the window falling 47 feet to the ground. Court argues this was reasonably foreseeable to
the average person.
Free, voluntary, and informed choice
R v Kennedy No.2 2007 – D passes needle filled with heroin to V. D appeals and his
conviction. Is quashed as no pressure from D, breaks chain of causation.
Vulnerabilities – you must take your victim as you find them (the eggshell skull rule).
R v Hayward 1908 – D is chasing V but during the pursuit she collapses and dies from a heart
attack. She had a rare thyroid issue, because she was frightened it caused her to have a
heart attack. However, nobody was aware of this, he was still the cause of her death.
R v Blaue 1975 – V had been stabbed, they were Jehovah witness and refused a blood
transfusion and dies. There was good chance of living if transfusion had taken place. Court
decided this didn’t break chain of causation, you have to take victim as you find them.
