@asdaapplejuice There are also other factors which can break the chain of causation, including acts of 3rd parties and the victims own act, i suggest you look at the case of 'Kimsey' and some other cases such as Roberts 1971
It was held according from the case of Malcherek 1981 that switching off a life support machine does NOT break the chain of causation; generally speaking, medical causation is unlikely to break the chain of causation unless it is 'in itself so potent in causing death' that the defendants acts are insignificant.
Malcherek appealed but he's conviction was upheld by the Court of Appeal.
@asdaapplejuice There are also other factors which can break the chain of causation, including acts of 3rd parties and the victims own act, i suggest you look at the case of 'Kimsey' and some other cases such as Roberts 1971
attaah18 1 month ago
It was held according from the case of Malcherek 1981 that switching off a life support machine does NOT break the chain of causation; generally speaking, medical causation is unlikely to break the chain of causation unless it is 'in itself so potent in causing death' that the defendants acts are insignificant.
Malcherek appealed but he's conviction was upheld by the Court of Appeal.
attaah18 1 month ago
@asdaapplejuice
wouldnt that be a novus actus interviens?
ohare1916 2 months ago
not necessarity, cause if the doctor has done more harm than the initiall assult/attack then the doctor will be held liable. Hole in your plot. BANG.
asdaapplejuice 4 months ago
rytt ==
TanyaMukhtar 9 months ago