FavoriteLoadingSave to briefcase | Rating: | By (2012)

  • PrintEmail Link
  • Viewed 21,322 times | Saved to 505 briefcases
R v Pagett (1983) 76 Cr App R 279


Stand-off in dark hallway. P shot at officers. They shot back. P was using G has a shield. Officers didn’t know about G was killed


Did Ps unlawful and deliberate acts cause or was a cause of Gs death?


A reasonable act performed for the purpose of self-preservation or done in performance of a legal duty, being of course itself an act caused by the accused’s own conduct, does not operate as a novus acuts interveniens.


When determining if an intervening 3rd party, not acting in concert with the accused, could relieve the accused of criminal responsibility, you consider whether the intervention is voluntary (free, deliberate, and informed).
Accused acts need not be sole cause, or even the main cause of the victims death, it being enough that his act contributed significantly to that result.
Novus actus interveniens – an intervening act of another person was independent of the act of the accused that it should be regarded in law as the cause of the victims death, as the exclusion of the act of the accused.


P was a cause of G’s death - it was not too remote

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to participate.

This document is a general discussion of certain legal and related issues and must not be relied upon as legal advice. This document may not have been written or reviewed by a legal practitioner. For more information, please see the website Terms of Service.