Thin skull principle essay

The main focus of the work is whether, if ever, the chain of causation can be broken in cases of manslaughter, this attribute alone would be sufficient to make it generic. Summarizing the Hermeneutic Principles The issue is that all people do hermeneutics and there are many differences but not far more than actually exist and the problem is cultural relativity, meaning that what exists and belongs in the first century and what is for all seasons.

For instance, suppose a plaintiff gets very drunk one night and wanders into the road, where she is hit by a speeding driver. This will become even more important when we begin to consider cases of manslaughter which make a distinction between harm caused by an illegal act and those caused by a legal act.

The clear theme arising from these cases is that the voluntary action of a victim must be caused by the criminal act of the accused. Dear and thin skull cases place a moral burden on potential criminal offenders not to take risks; this is to employ the morally evaluative reasoning behind strict liability offences.

This is to make a fundamental mistake about manslaughter by unlawful and dangerous act, the first step is to establish that an unlawful act has occurred and then to see whether that act caused the death.

In the case there were a number of issues that revolved around causation and the interplay between legal and factual causation was nowhere better illustrated. Those areas in the penumbrary cause the most difficulty for judges, academics and society in generally.

The child falls and scrapes her knees on the pavement and has to be hospitalized due to severe blood loss caused by her hemophilia. The problem is that the court specifically declined to make any comment about how this decision was grounded in principles of causation.

A person who suffers legal damage may be able to use tort law to receive damages, usually monetary compensation, from someone who is responsible or liable for those injuries. A the law is in effect much the same as the result in Kennedy No 2.

Free Law essays

In both cases the victims suffered heart attacks but the courts held the dangerousness of the act was only established in Watson because the harm was foreseeable. However, for our purposes we will want to consider the principles as they potentially apply to drug suppliers and other categories where legal causation may be difficult to establish.

The defendant is liable for the additional damage but not the pre-existing damage. The death occurred because of complications with the tracheotomy due to medical negligence, this occurred some 2 months after the shooting.

Psychic and physical assaults are different offences.

Undoubtedly in core cases the principles of causation sit nicely with the facts. However, there have been a series of cases over the 30 years regarding manslaughter which seem to imply that the chain of causation may not be able to be broken even by the voluntary intervention of third parties; the chain of causation may not be possible to break.

The first issue is just to briefly recap what exactly the crime of manslaughter is and how it is distinct from murder. The duty of care is the same whether or not a plaintiff has a pre-existing physical, mental or emotional condition.

And finally the main crux of confusion in Kennedy was highlighted from this point: This person is hit in the head by someone else. The case law that has flowed from the decision in that case has shown that causation is uniquely sensitive to the particular facts of a case.

Prima Facie in the supply case the intervening voluntary act of the victim acting in a free deliberate and informed manner would normally break the chain of causation. Does Harry intends of foresee Lemon to be afraid? There is no allowance for an already weakened state of the injured party.

The problem is that this is not really relevant in manslaughter by unlawful and dangerous act. The rationale of the drugs cases is to completely circumvent questions of causation by attempting to say that the voluntary act of injection was somehow overcome.

The victim had procured the drugs himself, injected the accused and then the accused had assisted the victim inject himself by holding the tourniquet. This is obviously damaging to principles of causation in that actual possession cannot be considered to have caused the death, it would be one of these incidental factors that we have discussed in the previous section.

In both these cases the victim had committed suicide but the accused had handed her a gun in a manner where it was very foreseeable that they would shoot themselves.The “eggshell skull” rule is named after the example frequently used in law schools.

Thin Skull Rule Definition:

The example describes an imaginary person who has an extremely thin skull that is as fragile as an eggshell, even though he looks completely normal. The eggshell skull rule says that a tortfeasor must take his victim as he finds him. Damages are not mitigated because the victim is more susceptible to injury than an average person.

Therefore, the court ruled against Pete for the full amount of damages incurred by Victor even though the kick would not have normally caused the extent of. This essay has been submitted by a law student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

Eggshell Skull Example

Discuss causation in criminal law. So the refusal of your victim to treatment would not relieve you of liability in the thin skull rule.

And so it wouldn’t break the chain of causation. Under legal causation the result must be caused by a culpable act, there is no requirement that the act of the defendant was the only cause, there must be no novus actus interveniens and the defendant must take his victim as he finds him (thin skull rule).

We will write a custom essay sample on Causation and Intervening Acts in Criminal Law specifically for you for only $ $ the ‘thin skull’ rule and the principle of novus actus interveniens.

Causation – In criminal law, individuals that are guilty of a crime are penalised for the harm they cause if both the physical and the. The distinction between a thin skull case and a crumbling skull case is that in the thin skull, the skull, although thinner than the average skull, is in a stable condition before the accident and, but for the accident, would have remained so.

Thin skull principle essay
Rated 5/5 based on 57 review