Causation in Light of its Current Intradogmatic Projections (II) Cover Image
  • Price 4.50 €

Raportul de cauzalitate în lumina actualelor sale proiectii intradogmatice (II)
Causation in Light of its Current Intradogmatic Projections (II)

Author(s): Ioana Curt
Subject(s): Law, Constitution, Jurisprudence
Published by: Universul Juridic
Keywords: causation; objective ascription; objective imputation theory; new intervening act; contributory act of the victim; lawful alternative behaviour; unprotected risk; allowed risk; confidence’s principle; redress prohibition; acting at one’s own risk; self

Summary/Abstract: The modern doctrine of causation has received scant attention in Romanian criminal law literature, despite the current european trend. In the first part of the article we have dealt with the conception of causation by analyzing it’s place within the topographic scheme of criminal offences, subsequently presenting a chronological approach of the different causation related theories elaborated throughout the years and finally reaching the modern approach of objective ascription, also known as the objective imputation theory. While exposing the first stage of the algorithm of the latter theory in the first part, the author moves on to the second part, continuing the analysis of the issue on four levels. The first part covers the materialization of the already analyzed relevant risk into a legally referred to consequence. Moving on, we will try breaking down the four groups of cases that attracted the attention of criminal law academics. These constructions try to introduce other factors into the causal analysis in order to determine their influence in the event. They may diminish or even exclude offender liability. Therefore the decisive task will be to determine which causal contribution was more “intense” or even “overwhelming.” The first group contains cases in which the chain of causation is interrupted by a new intervening cause, even if the offender created a legally relevant danger for the social value. The second group deals with cases in which the victim’s reckless behaviour takes place after the offender’s act, i.e., the victim, after being intentionally harmed by the offender, does not take care of her wounds or refuses to receive medical treatment. The third group in our study addresses the lawful alternative behaviour of the author as a cause of criminal impunity. Even if negatively influencing the line of causation by his actions, the author will be exempted from criminal responsibility if the original, bound to happen result, was equally damaging. The fourth and last group within our area of analysis, deals with the so-called unprotected risk. German law recognises a category of cases where there is no functional causal relationship between the violation of a legal duty and the actual result, in other words, the actual result is not covered by the aim or purpose of the legal provision.

  • Issue Year: VIII/2012
  • Issue No: 02
  • Page Range: 30-62
  • Page Count: 33
  • Language: Romanian