What is the ratio in R v Cheshire?

Medical negligence will only break the chain of causation if it is so independent of the defendant's acts and so extraordinary that it becomes the sole operating cause of death.

What did the court decide in R v Cheshire?

The Court of Appeal held that negligent medical treatment arising from treating the defendant's inflicted wounds did not break the chain of causation, upholding the conviction.

Why is R v Cheshire important for causation?

It establishes the leading test for when medical intervention can break the causal chain in criminal law and sets a high threshold for such breaks.

What is the ratio in R v Cheshire?

Medical negligence will only break the chain of causation if it is so independent of the defendant's acts and so extraordinary that it becomes the sole operating cause of death.

What did the court decide in R v Cheshire?

The Court of Appeal held that negligent medical treatment arising from treating the defendant's inflicted wounds did not break the chain of causation, upholding the conviction.

Why is R v Cheshire important for causation?

It establishes the leading test for when medical intervention can break the causal chain in criminal law and sets a high threshold for such breaks.

Criminal1 min read

R v Cheshire

[1991] 1 WLR 844Court of Appeal1991

Cite this case in OSCOLA →All Criminal cases →

“Medical negligence rarely breaks chain of causation in homicide cases”

Facts

The defendant shot the victim in the leg and stomach. During treatment at hospital, the victim developed breathing difficulties due to a rare complication from a tracheotomy performed by doctors. The medical staff failed to diagnose and treat this complication properly, and the victim died from asphyxia caused by the narrowed tracheotomy rather than the gunshot wounds.

Issues

Whether negligent medical treatment following the defendant's unlawful act broke the chain of causation, preventing the defendant from being liable for the victim's death.

Held

The defendant's conviction for manslaughter was upheld. The negligent medical treatment did not break the chain of causation between the shooting and the death.

Significance

This case established the modern test for when medical negligence constitutes a novus actus interveniens in homicide cases, providing greater certainty that defendants cannot escape liability merely due to poor medical treatment of their victims.

Read the full brief — free

You're reading the free summary of R v Cheshire. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.

Create free account Already have one? Sign in

No card required. Free forever.

OSCOLA Citation

R v Cheshire [1991] 1 WLR 844 (CA)

Criminal LawHomicideCausation

Read the full judgment elsewhere

Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.

LLBGDLSQE1

More Criminal cases

R v Reece Martin Kelly

[2026] EWCA Crim 268

R v Richard Alexander Welsh

[2026] EWCA Crim 466

R v Robert Michael Thomas

[2026] EWCA Crim 305

This case is reproduced verbatim from the public judgment published by The National Archives under the UK Government's Open Government Licence v3.0. If you appear in this case and believe it should not be published — for example because your conviction was quashed on appeal, you have statutory anonymity, or for other privacy reasons — request removal here.