The Court considered whether an intervening assault by a bar bouncer could sever legal causation after the appellants had already violently assaulted the victim, who later died.
It held that legal causation remains governed by whether the accused's dangerous unlawful acts were a significant contributing cause of death, and that foreseeability and independence are analytical tools, not standalone legal tests.
On the trial judge's factual findings, it was open to conclude the bouncer's conduct was a reasonably foreseeable response in an escalating bar fight and not sufficiently independent to break the causal chain.
The Court therefore upheld the result that the appellants could legally be found to have caused death and dismissed the appeal.
