LAW

Published on
​KembaraXtra-Case Law-Pagett (1983) CA
​Facts of the Case
  • Defendant (D) shot at police officers.
  • Victim (V) was used by D as a human shield against police gunfire.
  • V died from three bullet wounds inflicted by police.
  • D was charged with manslaughter.
Legal Issue
  • Did D's actions cause V's death?
  • Does V's act of self-preservation break the chain of causation?
Holding
  • D was guilty of manslaughter as his act contributed significantly to V's death.
Reasoning (Per Goff LJ)
  • Causation:
    • D's act need not be the sole cause, or even the main cause of the victim's death.
    • It is sufficient that his act contributed significantly to the result.
  • Novus Actus Interveniens (Breaking the Chain of Causation):
    • A reasonable act of self-preservation performed by the victim,
    • which is itself caused by the defendant's act,
    • does NOT operate as a novus actus interveniens.
Key Takeaways
  • "Significant Contribution" to causation is sufficient for manslaughter.
  • Victim's reasonable acts of self-preservation, if caused by the defendant, do not break the chain of causation.


Picture
0 Comments