S v Williams
Encyclopedia
In S v Williams, an important case in South African law, with significant implications specifically for the law of persons
, the accused broke into the home of the deceased with intent to rob her. On entering her bedroom, he shot her in the neck, and she was still breathing on her admission to hospital. Two days later, however, the doctors declared that she showed no sign of brain activity; her brainstem had ceased functioning, and was effectively dead. Two more days later, after thorough neurologic scrutiny, her ventilator was disconnected, and after ten minutes she was no longer registering any heart activity.
Facing a charge of murder, the accused argued that the cause of death
had not been the discharge of lead into her neck, but rather the disconnection of the ventilator: a novus actus interveniens. It was the doctor, he argued, who ought to be held liable for the death. Both the court a quo and the Appellate Division rejected this defence. The trial court found that the moment of death was when the brain had ceased to function, such that the deceased would have been long dead when the doctor disconnected the ventilator.
The Appellate Division found that it was unnecessary to decide on the legal propriety of this view, and instead resolved the matter on the basis of the "traditional view of the community", which is that one is dead when one stops breathing and one's heart stops beating. The court emphasised, however, that its silence on the issue of brain death should not be taken to be an indication that the approach of the trial court ought to be accepted. The question then was left open, and there remains to this day no general legal definition of death in South African law.
Law of persons in South Africa
The law of persons in South Africa is generally defined as regulating "the coming into being, private-law status and the coming to an end of a natural person." It determines the requirements and qualifications for legal personhood or subjectivity in South Africa, and the rights and responsibilities...
, the accused broke into the home of the deceased with intent to rob her. On entering her bedroom, he shot her in the neck, and she was still breathing on her admission to hospital. Two days later, however, the doctors declared that she showed no sign of brain activity; her brainstem had ceased functioning, and was effectively dead. Two more days later, after thorough neurologic scrutiny, her ventilator was disconnected, and after ten minutes she was no longer registering any heart activity.
Facing a charge of murder, the accused argued that the cause of death
Death
Death is the permanent termination of the biological functions that sustain a living organism. Phenomena which commonly bring about death include old age, predation, malnutrition, disease, and accidents or trauma resulting in terminal injury....
had not been the discharge of lead into her neck, but rather the disconnection of the ventilator: a novus actus interveniens. It was the doctor, he argued, who ought to be held liable for the death. Both the court a quo and the Appellate Division rejected this defence. The trial court found that the moment of death was when the brain had ceased to function, such that the deceased would have been long dead when the doctor disconnected the ventilator.
The Appellate Division found that it was unnecessary to decide on the legal propriety of this view, and instead resolved the matter on the basis of the "traditional view of the community", which is that one is dead when one stops breathing and one's heart stops beating. The court emphasised, however, that its silence on the issue of brain death should not be taken to be an indication that the approach of the trial court ought to be accepted. The question then was left open, and there remains to this day no general legal definition of death in South African law.