R v Malcherek and Steel [1981]

Court: Court of Appeal

Facts: The defendant, Malcherek, stabbed his wife, resulting in severe injuries that required medical intervention. She was placed on a life support machine. During surgery, she suffered irretrievable brain damage, and the doctors later determined that she was effectively dead and turned off the life support. Steel inflicted serious head injuries on a girl, and despite immediate medical treatment, her brain ceased functioning, leading to life support being disconnected as well. The critical issue was whether the medical decisions made post-injury broke the chain of causation concerning the defendants' actions.

Issue: Whether the medical treatment and decision to disconnect life support broke the chain of causation between the defendants' actions and the victims' deaths.

Held: The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals and upheld the convictions for murder. The court ruled that the original injuries inflicted by the defendants remained the operative cause of death, and thus, the decisions made by the medical professionals did not relieve the defendants of liability.

Key Judicial Statements : Lord Lane CJ noted that the original injury was a “continuing, operating and indeed substantial cause of the death.” He emphasized that a medical practitioner, when concluding that a patient is for practical purposes dead, does not prevent the person who inflicted the initial injury from being responsible for the victim’s death.

💡 Leveluplaw: reinforces the principle that a defendant can still be held criminally liable for a victim's death if their initial actions are deemed to be a substantial and operating cause, regardless of subsequent medical decisions. The judgment emphasizes the need for clarity regarding causation in criminal law and asserts that well-established medical practices do not sever the causal link when the original injuries remain significant contributors to the outcome.