Facts
- The defendant, Mr. Kennedy, prepared a syringe containing heroin and handed it to the victim, Mr. Marco Bosque.
- Mr. Bosque subsequently injected himself with the heroin and died from an overdose.
- Kennedy was initially convicted of manslaughter on the basis that his preparation and provision of the syringe contributed to Bosque's death.
- The prosecution did not claim that Kennedy had physically injected Bosque, but argued that his assistance constituted an unlawful act leading to manslaughter.
- The case proceeded to the House of Lords, focusing on whether Bosque's act of self-injection broke the chain of causation regarding Kennedy’s criminal liability.
Issues
- Whether the voluntary and informed self-injection of heroin by the victim constituted a novus actus interveniens, thereby breaking the chain of causation between Kennedy’s actions and the victim’s death.
- Whether the mere act of unlawfully supplying drugs imposes liability for manslaughter when the victim exercises autonomous choice in self-administration.
- Whether criminal causation in cases of drug-related deaths should distinguish between supply and direct administration of drugs.
Decision
- The House of Lords held that an adult victim's voluntary and informed act of self-injecting drugs constitutes a novus actus interveniens, breaking the chain of causation from the person who supplied the drug.
- Kennedy’s liability for manslaughter did not arise, as the law assumes adults of sound mind act with free will and are responsible for their own decisions.
- The court distinguished liability in cases where the defendant directly administers the drug, in which cases causation may remain unbroken.
- The judgment clarified that supply alone does not equal criminal responsibility for the resulting death if the victim knowingly and freely self-administers the drug.
Legal Principles
- Novus actus interveniens: A new, intervening act by a competent adult can break the chain of causation in criminal liability.
- Individual autonomy and free will are fundamental to assessing criminal responsibility, especially in unlawful act manslaughter.
- The law distinguishes between the supply of drugs and their administration; voluntary self-injection by the victim precludes manslaughter liability for the supplier.
- In drug-related manslaughter, criminal liability may arise only where the defendant administers the drug to the victim, not where the victim self-administers in a voluntary and informed manner.
Conclusion
R v Kennedy established that a competent adult’s voluntary and informed choice to self-inject drugs interrupts the legal chain of causation, absolving the supplier of manslaughter liability; this decision highlights the centrality of individual autonomy in criminal law and provides clear guidance for future cases involving unlawful act manslaughter and drug supply.
