This document summarizes several important criminal case laws related to causation, intent, diminished responsibility, provocation, gross negligence manslaughter, and unlawful act manslaughter. Some key cases discussed include R v Malcherek and Steel on brain death, R v White on causation in fact, R v Adomako on the test for gross negligence manslaughter, and R v Goodfellow which found a defendant guilty of both unlawful act manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter.

1. Some Criminal Case Law

2. R v Malcherek and Steel
Death occurs when the victim is 'brain dead’

3. AG Reference no 3 1994
A human is capable of having an existence
independent of its mother

4. R v White
Causation in Fact: 'but for' the actions of the
defendant the victim would still have still been
alive

5. R v Smith
Causation in Law: If the injury caused by the
defendant was an operative and substantial
cause of death the defendant will be guilty

6. R v Jordan
Novus actus interveniens: If medical
intervention is palpably wrong there may be a
break in the chain of causation

7. R v Paggett
Novus actus interveniens: A reasonably
foreseeable intervention of a third party will
not break the chain of causation

8. R v Roberts
Novus actus interveniens: A reasonably
foreseeable intervention of a third party will
not break the chain of causation.

9. R v Dear
Novus actus interveniens: Where a victim
neglects their injuries, the chain of causation
will not be broken if it worsens the injury

10. R v Blaue
Thin skull rule: Where the victim has a weakness
that worsens the injury, the chain of causation will
not be broken. You must take your victim as you
find them

11. R v Woollin
Oblique intent: occurs where the consequence
is a virtual certainty

12. R v Vickers
MR for Murder: Where the defendant intended
to cause GBH and the victim died, the correct
charge is murder.

13. R v Byrne
Diminished Responsibility: The leading case
that illustrates irresistible impulses that cannot
be controlled and may amount to diminished
responsibility

14. R v Dietschmann
Diminished Responsibility: D was intoxicated
and pleading diminished responsibility, the
courts should consider whether despite being
drunk whether the mental responsibility was
impaired

15. R v Duffy
Provocation (Now Loss of Control): Under the
common law the 'loss of control' has to be
sudden and temporary

16. R v Pearson
Provocation (Now Loss of Control): Third party
provocation could cause a defendant to lose
self control

17. R v Ahluwalia
Provocation (Now Loss of Control): Where
there is a time delay between the provocative
act and the behavior of D the D will not be able
to rely on the defence as set out in s3 of the
Homicide Act 1957. One of the factors that led
to reform.

18. R v Thornton
Provocation (Now Loss of Control):A minor
incident could act as the last straw and trigger
and sudden final loss of control, following a
long build up of provocation

19. R v Camplin
Provocation (Now Loss of Control):The case
that developed the rule that age and sex may
be taken into consideration when considering
the objective test aspect for provocation

20. R v Holley
Provocation (Now Loss of Control):This Privy
Council case states that the jury must consider
the effect of provocation of a person of the
same age and sex, but with ordinary powers of
self control

21. R v Stone and Dobinson
GNM and Omissions: Ds failure to feed or get
medical attention for the Ds sister amounted to
an assumed responsibility where by they were
convicted of gross negligence

22. R v Wacker
GNM: A defendant owes a duty of care to a
victim when they are complicit in the
commission of a crime with each other despite
the civil law position.

23. R v Church
UAM: The test for whether an unlawful act is
'dangerous' is objective this need not amount to
serious harm, some harm would be sufficient

24. R v Adomako
GNM: The leading case for gross negligence.
Was a Duty Owed? Was it breached? Did it
result in death?

25. R v Goodfellow
GNM and UAM: D could be found guilty of both
unlawful act manslaughter and gross
negligence?

26. R v Lidar
Reckless Manslaughter: Where the D is aware
of a significant and highly probable risk of
causing serious injury and causes death.