Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our expert legal writers, as a learning aid to help law students with their studies.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of LawTeacher.net. Any information contained in this case summary does not constitute legal advice and should be treated as educational content only.

R v Williams and Davies - 1992

353 words (1 pages) Case Summary

28th Oct 2021 Case Summary Reference this In-house law team

Jurisdiction / Tag(s): UK Law

Legal Case Summary

R v Williams and Davies [1992] 1 WLR 380

Unlawful Act Manslaughter – Causation – Eggshell Skull Rule

Facts

The defendants picked up a hitchhiker who was on his way to Glastonbury festival.  The defendants then attempted to rob the victim who became agitated and afraid and in this mental state jumped out of the moving vehicle which was travelling at 30 mph.  The victim hit his head and died of his injuries.  The defendants were charged with manslaughter.  What had happened in the car to cause the victim to jump out was not certain.

Issues

Whether the act of the defendant in jumping out of the car broke the chain of causation.  The victim had jumped out of the car and this was an act of his which may have been argued to have broken the chain of causation between the defendant’s unlawful act of robbing the victim and his death.  What role the question of foreseeability of the victim’s actions played in the defendant’s guilt.

Decision / Outcome

The defendants were found not guilty after a direction to this effect was given to the jury.  Modifying the test set down in R v Roberts (1971) 56 Cr App R 95 which held that the chain of causation would only be broken if the victim committed an act so unforeseeable that no reasonable man could be expected to foresee the act, it was held that the jury should consider whether the victim’s act was within the range of reasonable responses available to the victim in the circumstances.  This required consideration of his psychological state and any particular characteristics of the victim and an acknowledgement that the stress of the situation or event may lead to the victim acting without thought.  In this case however there was not enough evidence that the defendant’s acts had led to the victim’s reaction being within the range of reasonable responses available to him.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

Related Content

Jurisdictions / Tags

Content relating to: "UK Law"

UK law covers the laws and legislation of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Essays, case summaries, problem questions and dissertations here are relevant to law students from the United Kingdom and Great Britain, as well as students wishing to learn more about the UK legal system from overseas.

Related Articles