R v Smith (Thomas Joseph)
Encyclopedia
R. v. Smith [1959] 2 QB 35, [1959] A.C. is an English criminal law case, dealing with causation
and homicide
. The court ruled that negligence of medical staff does not break the chain of causation in murder cases
The victim was stabbed, but the attending doctor did not realise the full extent of his injuries, causing death.
The court said that the stabbing was still the 'operating' cause of death, and therefore the defendant is guilty.
Issue: Did Smith cause the death of the stab victim?
Defence: argued that death was not the sole and natural consequence of wound, and hence, did not flow directly from it.
Court: Essence of causation test – is that if at the time of death, the wound is still an operating and substantial cause, then death is caused by the wound, even though another operating cause may be present. This is often referred to as the chain of causation. If the original wound is merely a setting in which another cause operates, then it cannot be said that death resulted from the stab wound. Is the second cause so overwhelming so as to make the first wound merely part of the history?
One question to ask is: Can you show a new cause which disturbs the sequence of events?
Held: The Court looked to particular facts of the case, and Smith was convicted, as he satisfied the Essence of causation test. If the stabbed soldier had received proper treatment while in emergency care, he would have had a good chance of a complete recovery. Smith was consequently convicted of manslaughter because the wound was in fact the “operating and substantial cause of death”. The University students must aware with this case.
Causation (law)
Causation is the "causal relationship between conduct and result". That is to say that causation provides a means of connecting conduct with a resulting effect, typically an injury. In criminal law, it is defined as the actus reus from which the specific injury or other effect arose and is...
and homicide
Homicide
Homicide refers to the act of a human killing another human. Murder, for example, is a type of homicide. It can also describe a person who has committed such an act, though this use is rare in modern English...
. The court ruled that negligence of medical staff does not break the chain of causation in murder cases
The victim was stabbed, but the attending doctor did not realise the full extent of his injuries, causing death.
The court said that the stabbing was still the 'operating' cause of death, and therefore the defendant is guilty.
Case Brief
Facts: Smith stabbed the victim who died 4 hours later; A fellow member of his company had dropped the stab victim on the way to the hospital to get treatment. Once in emergency care, there was no blood transfusion. The victim was given saline solution (which, medically, is a gross error), and used artificial respiration - not knowing that the victim was suffering from a pierced lung). It was stated that with proper treatment, chances of the victim's survival was about 75%.Issue: Did Smith cause the death of the stab victim?
Defence: argued that death was not the sole and natural consequence of wound, and hence, did not flow directly from it.
Court: Essence of causation test – is that if at the time of death, the wound is still an operating and substantial cause, then death is caused by the wound, even though another operating cause may be present. This is often referred to as the chain of causation. If the original wound is merely a setting in which another cause operates, then it cannot be said that death resulted from the stab wound. Is the second cause so overwhelming so as to make the first wound merely part of the history?
One question to ask is: Can you show a new cause which disturbs the sequence of events?
Held: The Court looked to particular facts of the case, and Smith was convicted, as he satisfied the Essence of causation test. If the stabbed soldier had received proper treatment while in emergency care, he would have had a good chance of a complete recovery. Smith was consequently convicted of manslaughter because the wound was in fact the “operating and substantial cause of death”. The University students must aware with this case.