Abstract:
Section 300(c) has long been a controversial provision of the Penal Code. Whereas much of the academic discussion on this section has focused on the subjective limb of the Virsa Singh test, this article argues that the oft neglected objective limb of the test is equally important. It should be applied more rigorously so that it can perform its intended function of ensuring that a charge of murder is only made out when the injury intentionally inflicted by the accused is sufficiently serious. This article argues that where the relevant injury can be assessed at various levels, care must be taken to identify the correct particular injury to be analysed. The particular injury should then be analysed through a detailed framework which includes analysing the chance of the injury resulting in death in percentage terms, ensuring that (only) appropriate considerations are taken into account when determining sufficiency, and having the forensic witnesses specifically consider whether it would be more accurate to describe the injury as one that is “likely to cause death”.