Kuwait Court of Cassation principle number 166

Summary: - Causation in criminal matters is a material relationship beginning with the act committed by the offender and connected, in its mental aspect, with the usual consequences of his act that he ought to foresee if he commits it intentionally. Its assessment is for the trial judge. No review by the Court of Cassation. The limit of this. - The offender’s liability in the offence of assault, wounding, or causing harm extends to all consequences likely to result from his criminal conduct, even indirectly, such as falling and striking a hard object. Rule: It is established that causation in criminal matters is a material relationship beginning with the act committed by the offender and connected, in its mental aspect, with the usual consequences of his act that he ought to foresee if he commits it intentionally. This relationship is a factual question assessed exclusively by the trial judge. Once he determines its existence or absence, the Court of Cassation has no power of review over him, provided that his determination rests on reasons leading to his conclusion. Since the challenged judgment established against the appellant that he struck the victim, causing him to fall from the stairs to the ground and sustain the injuries described in the autopsy report which caused his death, and the judgment demonstrated the causal link between the act attributed to the appellant and the injuries that led to death, this establishes the appellant’s liability, on a correct application of the law, for this consequence, which he had a duty to foresee. It is established that the offender in the offence of assault, wounding, or causing harm is liable for all consequences likely to result from his criminal conduct, even indirectly, such as falling or striking a hard object and others, as in this case. Since the findings of the challenged judgment, taken together, are reasonable and sufficient to establish the appellant’s criminal liability and the existence of causation, his criticism of the judgment in this respect is unfounded.