R v Pagett [1983]

1. Facts:

• The defendant (D) was involved in a police siege and took his girlfriend hostage.

• During the standoff, a shootout began between D and the police.

• In the course of the exchange, D's girlfriend was killed by the police gunfire.

2. Outcome:

• D was convicted of murder.

• The court found that D was responsible for the death of his girlfriend, despite the fatal shots being fired by the police.

• It was held that the actions of the police were not voluntary or free, as they were responding in self-defence while D was actively shooting at them.

3. Impact and Analysis:

• Legal Causation: Lord Goff explained that for legal causation, it must be shown that the defendant's actions made a "significant contribution" to the outcome. In this case, D's actions were the significant contributing factor to the death of his girlfriend.

• Acting in Duty: The police's actions were deemed necessary and lawful under self-defence, which did not break the chain of causation. Their actions were considered a direct response to D's aggression, thus maintaining D's liability.

• Legal Precedent: Pagett highlights how causation is assessed in complex situations involving multiple parties. It demonstrates that a defendant's liability for a victim's death can persist even if the death results from the actions of another party, provided those actions are a direct response to the defendant's criminal conduct.