Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Involuntary Manslaughter (Gross Negligence Manslaughter (Duty of Care…
Involuntary Manslaughter
Overview
An unlawful killing where the defendant doesn't have the mens rea for muder.
Unlawful Act Manslaughter
Causation : Factual and Legal with all cases
Mens Rea
The mens rea for unlawful act manslaughter is the MR for the unlawful act and is not necessary for the D to realise the act was unlawful
DPP V Newbury & Jones
Assault
Intentionally or recklessly causing the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful violence
Battery
Intentionally or recklessly applying force to a victim
S.47 ABH
MR for the assault or battery which occasions actual bodily harm
S.20 GBH
Intentionally or recklessly inflicting grevious bodily harm or wounding
Unlawful Act
It must be an unlawful criminal act
Franklin
If any element of the crime is missing then it's not an unlawful act
Lamb
It must be unlawful not something that becomes unlawful
Andrews
An Omission is insufficent
Lowe
The offence must be identified by the prosecution
Jennings
The offence doesn't have to be aimed at the victim
Goodfellow
Dangerous Act
This is an Objective Test
Newbury & Jones
'all sober and reasonable people would inevitably recognize must subject the other person to, at least, the risk of some harm, albeit not serious harm'
Church
The D has the same knowledge and understanding as the Sober and Reasonable Person
Dawson;Watson
Gross Negligence Manslaughter
Duty of Care
Criminal Court
A duty of care under the criminal court is owed by an Omission (Failure to Act)
Statutory Duty
S1. Children and Young Persons Act 1933
Contractual Duty
R V Pittwood
Official Position
R V Dytham
Assumption Of Responsibility
Stone & Dobinson
Special Relationship
Gibbins & Procter
Dangerous Situation
R V Miller
Civil Court
A Duty of Care is owed in the civil court through the 3 stage test
Caparo V Dickman
Reasonably Forseeable
Jolley V Sutton
Proximity
Bourhill V Young
Fair, Just, Reasonable
Hill V CC of WY
Breach Of Duty
2 Tests for Breach of Duty
Reasonable Man Test
Blyth V Birmingham Waterworks
Defendant is a professional (Bolam Test)
Bolam V Friern Hospital
Doctor
Bateman
Breach Factors
Size of the risk
Bolton V Stone
Precautions Taken
Latimer v AEC
Wider Public Benefit
Watts V Herts CC
Obvious Risk of Death
The reasonably prudent person would have forseen a serious and obvious risk of death
Singh
Misra
Causation - Factual and Legal Causation with all of the cases
Factual
But for The defendants actions would the death have occured
White
Legal Causation
De Minimus Principle - Has the Defendant made more than a minimal contribution to the Defendants death
Pagett
Intervening Acts
Act of a 3rd Party
Cheshire - Does the D's conduct overwhelm the intervening act and render it insignificant
Smith - was the Conduct 'throughly bad' and was the Original Injury still operating
Act of a Victim
Roberts - Was the V's conduct daft of unexpected in a fight or flight mode
Act of God - No cases
Thin Skull Rule
You must take your victim as you find them if they have any pre - existing vulnerabilities
Blaue
Grossly Negligent
Showed such disregard for the life and safety of others as to amount to a crime
Bateman confirmed in Adomako
Truly Exceptionally Bad
Sellu
No MR for Gross Negligence Manslaughter
AG Ref No.2 1999