levo
Log inStart

General Elements of Criminal Liability

Causation in criminal law

  • 3 things to know
  • Component 1

Overview

Recall questions on factual causation and the but for test in R v White, legal causation and multiple causes in R v Pagett, the thin skull rule in R v Blaue, and whether medical treatment, the victim or a third party breaks the chain, as in R v Smith, R v Cheshire and R v Roberts.

What you need to know

Answer each one before you reveal it.

Your recallNot started
Key term

How would you apply the 'but for' test to determine factual causation?

Process

Why was the defendant in R v White not guilty of murder?

Key term

Give an example of factual impossibility in an attempt, and explain its effect on liability.

Questions from this subtopic

Each one with the model answer underneath.

  1. 1

    What must be proved regarding causation for result crimes?

    Model answer

    For result crimes, the actus reus requires proof that the defendant's act or omission caused the prohibited consequence.

  2. 2

    Must the defendant's act be the sole or main cause of the result for legal causation?

    Model answer

    No, the defendant's act need not be the sole or main cause, but it must be more than minimal.

  3. 3

    Why did the victim's refusal of treatment in R v Blaue not break the chain of causation?

    Model answer

    Because the defendant must take the victim as they find them, including their religious beliefs; the refusal was a consequence of those beliefs, not an independent intervening act.

  4. 4

    What principle does R v Roberts establish regarding a victim's escape attempt?

    Model answer

    R v Roberts establishes that a victim's escape attempt will not break the chain of causation if it was reasonably foreseeable as a response to the defendant's conduct.

  5. 5

    In R v Roberts, why did the victim jumping from a moving car not break the chain of causation?

    Model answer

    Because the victim's attempt to escape the defendant's sexual assault was a reasonably foreseeable response to his threatening conduct.

  6. 6

    When will a third party's act break the chain of causation?

    Model answer

    A third party's act will break the chain only if it is free, deliberate, and informed, and not a foreseeable consequence of the defendant's conduct.

See the rest and revise

Other ways to work this

The same content, four other ways.

What is inside Levo

Six ways to work the same material.

1Closed book
2Open book
3Closed book

The 3-step method, run for you

Answer cold, learn it, then prove it stuck. Levo tracks the jump between your first attempt and your last.

Civil Courts and Other Forms of Dispute Resolution
Criminal Courts and Lay People
Legal Personnel
Access to Justice

Cram a whole paper in one sitting

Sort every topic into what you know and what you do not, then drill only the weak ones.

The Council of .
EuropeMinistersJustice

Blank Blitz makes facts automatic

Rapid timed gap-fills on the terms and numbers you need to recall without thinking.

AThe injury to the claimant's rights is small.
BThe injury is capable of being estimated in money.
CThe injury can be adequately compensated by a small payment.

Build It gets the exam shape right

Assemble a full-mark answer from its marking points, in the order an examiner wants them.

Royal Assent has not been refused since 1708.
TrueFalse

Test It catches misconceptions

Spot the fault in a statement. The traps are the mistakes students actually make.

721941163128510

Brain Breaks between sessions

Short focus games to reset attention, so the next set lands better than the last.

Every question in General Elements of Criminal Liability, on a schedule.

Attempt a question from memory, write the correct version, then attempt it again. Levo records the jump between your first attempt and your last, and brings each question back on the day you are due to forget it.

Start revising, £5 a monthSee how the method works

Or £46 a year, about £3.83 a month. Cancel anytime.