Actus Reus

Question 1

What is AR

Answer 1

‘guilty act’ in latin

Question 2

where is AR mostly found

Answer 2

common law and statutes

Question 3

what are conduct crimes

Answer 3

crimes that do not require a particular consequence e.g theft

Question 4

what are result crimes

Answer 4

crimes that conduct in certain circumstances as well as a particul results is required e.g. Murder

Question 5

what case defines that actus reus is always required?

Answer 5

Deller

Question 6

what case defnies that conduct must be voluntary

Answer 6

Hill and baxter

Question 7

when does causation apply

Answer 7

actus reus on result crimes

Question 8

if there was no chain of causation or causal link, there will not be….

Answer 8

an actus reus

Question 9

Causation consists of two parts, what two parts are they

Answer 9

factual and legal causation

Question 10

what is factual causation also known as

Answer 10

BUT FOR TEST

Question 11

what case defines the factual causation aka the but for test

Answer 11

White, poison in mothers drink, mother didnt die of poison but of heart attack.

Question 12

what does legal causation look at?

Answer 12

the legal causation is looking at whether the defendant was the operating and substantial cause

Question 13

what is substantial cause? what defines this?

Answer 13

it means that the defendants actions must contribute significantly to the end results - case that defines this is Cheshire

Question 14

what case says there may be a number of operating and substantial causes of the result

Answer 14

Mellor

Question 15

what case provide the ‘de minimis’ principle and what is the meaing of it

Answer 15

Cato, where defendants actions have to be more than trivia cause of the result

Question 16

what does pagett define

Answer 16

d’s act need not be the sole or even main cause of v’s death

Question 17

what does the operating cause mean

Answer 17

means that the defendants actions must have a direct effect to the result and there is no break in the chain of causation - or novus actus interveniens.

Question 18

what five things could amount to an novus actus interveniens

Answer 18

victim self administering drugs
victim trying to escape
victim trying to refuse treatment on religious grounds
victime interfering with own injuries
medical negligence

Question 19

what was the nai in kennedy

Answer 19

victim self administering drugs

Question 20

what was the nai in roberts

Answer 20

victim trying to escape - reasonable

Question 21

what was the nai in williams

Answer 21

victim trying to escape - not reasonable

Question 22

what was the nai in blaue and what rule was made

Answer 22

victim refusing treatment on religious grounds and the rule was the thin skull rule, find them as you take them.

Question 23

what was the nai in dear

Answer 23

victim interfering with own injuries - v reopened wounds, nevertheless d was still guilty because injuries would not be there if they did not do it

Question 24

what was the nai in r v cheshire

Answer 24

medical negligence, d still guilty because bullet wound was significant cause of death

Question 25

what was the nai in smith

Answer 25

medical negligence, d still guilty because original wound was still the operating and substantial cause of death

Question 26

what was the nai in malcherek and steel

Answer 26

medical negligence, d still guilty because d held to be operating and substantial cause of death (life support)

Question 27

what was the nai in jordan

Answer 27

medical negligence, DOCTORS GUILTY, because treatment was described as palpably wrong so the chain of causation was broken by the doctors negligence.