Podcast
Questions and Answers
In legal causation, which case is typically referenced?
In legal causation, which case is typically referenced?
- R v White
- R v Pagett
- R v Blaue
- R v Kimsey (correct)
According to the 'thin skull rule,' a defendant must take the victim as they find them, except for pre-existing physical weaknesses.
According to the 'thin skull rule,' a defendant must take the victim as they find them, except for pre-existing physical weaknesses.
False (B)
Name the case that exemplifies the application of the 'thin skull rule'.
Name the case that exemplifies the application of the 'thin skull rule'.
R v Blaue
When medical treatment is considered an intervening act, it can break the chain of causation unless the original injury is still a/an ______ cause.
When medical treatment is considered an intervening act, it can break the chain of causation unless the original injury is still a/an ______ cause.
Match each case with the corresponding principle they illustrate regarding intervening acts:
Match each case with the corresponding principle they illustrate regarding intervening acts:
In what scenario is a defendant typically NOT held liable due to intervening acts?
In what scenario is a defendant typically NOT held liable due to intervening acts?
In 'drug cases,' like R v Kennedy, the supplier of drugs is always responsible for the death of the user, regardless of the user's voluntary act.
In 'drug cases,' like R v Kennedy, the supplier of drugs is always responsible for the death of the user, regardless of the user's voluntary act.
In cases, such as R v Malcherek and Steel, under what circumstances may switching off life support not break the chain of causation?
In cases, such as R v Malcherek and Steel, under what circumstances may switching off life support not break the chain of causation?
In R v Wallace, the defendant was not held liable because the victim's ______ broke the chain of causation.
In R v Wallace, the defendant was not held liable because the victim's ______ broke the chain of causation.
Match each type of 'Actus Reus' with its corresponding case example:
Match each type of 'Actus Reus' with its corresponding case example:
Which case is most closely associated with the actus reus of 'state of affairs'?
Which case is most closely associated with the actus reus of 'state of affairs'?
In cases of omission, a 'contractual duty' to act is sufficient to establish actus reus even without any direct relationship with the victim.
In cases of omission, a 'contractual duty' to act is sufficient to establish actus reus even without any direct relationship with the victim.
Which case law involves 'relationship' omission to establish actus reus.
Which case law involves 'relationship' omission to establish actus reus.
R v Stone and Dobinson is a case of omission pertaining to the ______ undertaken voluntarily.
R v Stone and Dobinson is a case of omission pertaining to the ______ undertaken voluntarily.
Match the following Cases with the type of Omission that establishes Actus Reus.
Match the following Cases with the type of Omission that establishes Actus Reus.
Which common law case establishes Actus Reus based on a 'position' of duty?
Which common law case establishes Actus Reus based on a 'position' of duty?
In R v Miller, the omission to act does not create original danger, it only aggravates an existing situation.
In R v Miller, the omission to act does not create original danger, it only aggravates an existing situation.
In the context of Actus Reus, which scenario involves an example of establishing Actus Reus when a 'danger' has been created.
In the context of Actus Reus, which scenario involves an example of establishing Actus Reus when a 'danger' has been created.
A 'conduct crime,' as exemplified by Hill v Baxter, criminalizes the ______, irrespective of its outcome.
A 'conduct crime,' as exemplified by Hill v Baxter, criminalizes the ______, irrespective of its outcome.
Match each scenario with the relevant case concerning Actus Reus.
Match each scenario with the relevant case concerning Actus Reus.
Flashcards
Legal Causation
Legal Causation
Deals with establishing the act was a significant cause of the result.
Thin Skull Rule
Thin Skull Rule
This principle dictates you must take your victim as you find them.
intervening acts
intervening acts
Actions by the victim or third parties that break the chain of causation.
Conduct crime
Conduct crime
Signup and view all the flashcards
State of Affairs
State of Affairs
Signup and view all the flashcards
Omission
Omission
Signup and view all the flashcards
Contractual Duty
Contractual Duty
Signup and view all the flashcards
Relationship Duty
Relationship Duty
Signup and view all the flashcards
Undertaken Voluntary Duty
Undertaken Voluntary Duty
Signup and view all the flashcards
Position Duty
Position Duty
Signup and view all the flashcards
Danger Created Duty
Danger Created Duty
Signup and view all the flashcards
Study Notes
Actus Reus
- Conduct crime: Hill v Baxter
- State of Affairs: R v Larsonneur
- Consequence
- Omission
- Contractual: R v Pitwood
- Relationship: R v Gibbins + Proctor
- Undertaken voluntarily: R v Stone + Dobinson
- Position: R v Dytham
- Danger created: R v Miller / R v Evans
- Statutory
Causation
- Factual: R v Pagett / R v White
- Legal: R v Kimsey
- Thin Skull Rule: R v Blaue
Intervening Acts
- Medical treatment: R v Jordan / R v Smith
- Natural but unpredictable
- Victim's own act: R v Roberts / R v Williams
- Drug cases: R v Kennedy
- Life-support: R v Malcherek + Steel
- Victim's self-neglect: R v Wallace
Studying That Suits You
Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.