Skip to content

9084 · 2.1.1

Actus reus — practice questions

Practice and worked examples for 9084 Actus reus. Short previews only — attempt the full question in MarkScheme against the official scheme.

Worked example 1

Alex stabs Ben, who is taken to hospital. Ben dies after a nurse mistakenly gives the wrong drug. Advise whether Alex is the legal cause of Ben's death. [10 marks]

Show solution outline

Issue: Whether Alex's stabbing is the legal cause of death despite medical error.

Actus reus — conduct: Stabbing is a voluntary act — clearly satisfies conduct element of homicide.

Factual causation (but-for): But for Alex's stabbing, Ben would not have been in hospital. Factual cause established (contrast R v White where victim died independently).

Legal causation: Must be operating and substantial cause at time of death (R v Smith — original wound still operating). Thin skull rule — take victim as found (R v Blaue).

Medical negligence (novus actus): R v Jordanpalpably wrong treatment may break chain (rare). R v Cheshire — only if original injury becomes merely background; medical treatment normal even if negligent will not break chain.

Application: Stabbing is serious wound — likely still operating cause when wrong drug administered. Nurse's error must be so independent and potent as to make stabbing insignificant (Cheshire test).

Conclusion: Alex likely legally causes death — medical error usually insufficient to break chain unless wholly unrelated to original injury.

Exam tip: Work through voluntary act → but-for → legal cause → intervening act in order.

Worked example 2

David is found asleep in the driver's seat of his car at 2:00 am. The keys are in the ignition. A breath test at 4:00 am shows his breath alcohol level is 55 micrograms (µg) of alcohol per 100 millilitres (ml) of breath. The legal limit is 35 µg/100ml. An expert estimates that alcohol is eliminated from his body at an average rate of 7.5 µg/100ml per hour. Advise whether the actus reus for being in charge of a vehicle with excess alcohol can be proven at 2:00 am.

Show solution outline

Issue: Can the prosecution prove the actus reus of the offence under s.4 Road Traffic Act 1988?

Actus Reus - State of Affairs: The actus reus is a 'state of affairs'. This requires proving two elements: (1) David was 'in charge' of the vehicle, and (2) he was over the prescribed alcohol limit at that time.

1. 'In Charge' of the Vehicle: David is in the driver's seat with the keys in the ignition. This creates a strong presumption that he is 'in charge' of the vehicle, as per cases like DPP v Watkins [1989]. This element is likely satisfied.

2. Excess Alcohol (Back-Calculation): The test was taken at 4:00 am, but the alleged offence occurred at 2:00 am. The prosecution must prove his alcohol level at 2:00 am. This requires a 'back-calculation'.

  • Step 1: Time Elapsed: The time between being found (2:00 am) and the test (4:00 am) is 2 hours.
  • Step 2: Alcohol Eliminated: Calculate the amount of alcohol eliminated from the body during this period.
    • Formula: Time elapsed × Elimination rate
    • Calculation: 2 hours × 7.5 µg/100ml per hour = 15 µg/100ml
  • Step 3: Level at Time of Offence: Add the eliminated alcohol back to the reading taken at 4:00 am.
    • Formula: Reading at test + Alcohol eliminated
    • Calculation: 55 µg/100ml + 15 µg/100ml = 70 µg/100ml

Comparison to Legal Limit: The prescribed legal limit is 35 µg/100ml. David's estimated breath alcohol level at 2:00 am was 70 µg/100ml.

Conclusion: The actus reus can be proven. The back-calculation demonstrates that at the time David was in charge of the car, his breath alcohol level was 70 µg/100ml, which is double the legal limit. (Note: David may have a statutory defence if he can prove there was no likelihood of him driving, but this does not negate the actus reus).