Actus Reus (+Cases) +Causation

Question 1

What are the two general principles of AR?

Answer 1

1. D must have done the act voluntarily
2. D must have done a positive Act

Question 2

What 3 things can constitute an Actus Reus?

Answer 2

1. An act
2. An omission (failure to act)
3. A state of Affairs

Question 3

Is there a ‘duty to be a hero’ under English law?

Answer 3

No

Question 4

Define ‘duty to be a hero’

Answer 4

One’s personal task to step up and act (not necessary)

Question 5

What is a consequence crime?

Answer 5

For the offence to have been committed a certain consequence (result) must occur as a result of D’s actions

Question 6

What is a conduct crime?

Answer 6

A crime can be committed by the actions of the D even if there is no consequence (result) of those actions

Question 7

Example of a conduct crime?

Answer 7

Speeding

Question 8

Hill v Baxter
Hint: voluntary AR

Answer 8

Examples of situations that may occur which would cause D to act involuntarily, meaning AR will not be proved

Question 9

What type of crimes are an exception to the general principle,e that the act has to be voluntary?

Answer 9

State of Affairs crimes

Question 10

What are State of affairs crimes?

Answer 10

Crimes where the AR is satisfied by D being in a particular circumstance at a particular time

Question 11

Winzar v Chief Constable of Kent
Hint: State of Affairs crime

Answer 11

Being drunk on a public highway when he was removed by the police from a hospital and put back in his car parked outside. AR was satisfied despite his act not being committed voluntarily

Question 12

Can some crimes be committed by omission?

Answer 12

Yes

Question 13

R v Pitwood
Hint: omission

Answer 13

A contractual duty to act existed on the facts due to D’s employment as a railway-crossing keeper. D failed to shut the gate and V was killed by a train.

Question 14

R v Dytham
Hint: omission

Answer 14

A police officer witnessed a violent attack on V and did not intervene (occupation of being a police officer suggests he should’ve

Question 15

Which common Law duty to act was established in R v Miller?

Answer 15

D had created a dangerous situation by leaving a lit cigarette on his bed which caught fire. When he realised he left the room making no attempt to put it out or get help.

Question 16

Stone and Dobbinson is an example of which common law duty to act?

Answer 16

D has taken on a voluntary duty toward the V.
Stone’s sister lived with Stone and his girlfriend. The sister died after becoming ill, S and D did not care for her. S owed her a duty of care as her sister, D was found to have taken on some caring role which amounted to a voluntary duty to act. Their failure to help her or get her help formed the AR of the crime.

Question 17

Name a case that demonstrates the common law duty to act due to a special relationship between D and V

Answer 17

Gibbons and Proctor
A child’s father and his girlfriend failed to feed the child who died. They had a duty to care for V as a result of the parent and child relationship, D’s omission formed the AR of the crime.

Question 18

What was the D in R v White found not guilty?

Answer 18

D was not the factual cause of V’s death, causation could not be proved.
D put poison in mother’s drink, V died of a heart attack before she could drink it all.

Question 19

Factual causation test?

Answer 19

The ‘but for’ test, but for D’s actions, would V have been harmed?
In White, ‘but for’ D’s actions, the V would still have died - D not guilty

Question 20

R v Pagett
Hint: ‘But For’

Answer 20

‘But for’ D’s actions V would not have died, factual causation was proved.
D used his girlfriend as a human shield as he fired at police, police fired back at D and killed V. D guilty of V’s manslaughter

Question 21

Factual and legal causation must be proved for which type of crime and why?

Answer 21

Consequence crime
Because it must be proved that a certain consequence (result) was caused by D.

Question 22

Legal Causation Test

Answer 22

It must be proved D’s actions are more than slight or trifling (the de minimis rule) in causing the criminal result

Question 23

Legal causation in R v Kimsey?
Hint: cars

Answer 23

D & girlfriend were racing in separate cars. Girlfriend, V, died driving her car

D’s actions, despite V driving her own car, were considered to be more than trivial or trifling in causing the death of V

Question 24

What 3 things can constitute an intervening act and break the chain of causation?

Answer 24

1. V’s own actions
2. Actions of a third party
3. An unforeseen natural event

Question 25

R v Cheshire Rule? Hint: health

Answer 25

Medical treatment will only break the chain of causation where it is so independent of D's actions that it renders D's original act insignificant.

Question 26

R v Jordan Hint: novus actus

Answer 26

D stabbed V but V had almost healed when doctor administered drug V was allergic to, killing V Actions of a third party (the doctors) because original wound had almost healed and doctor's actions were palpably wrong

Question 27

R v Williams Hint: novus Actus

Answer 27

Ds picked up hitchhiker, V. V jumped out of moving car. There was insufficient evidence that Ds had done anything to V to cause this D not guilty a V's own actions were novus actus interveniens

Question 28

Thin Skull Rule?

Answer 28

You must take your victim as you find them. A V's own frailties will not break chain of causation

Question 29

R v Blaue Hint: thin skull

Answer 29

D stabbed V. V refused blood transfusion on religious grounds and died. D claimed V's own actions broke chain of causation Thin skull rule applies to religious beliefs, D had to 'take his V as he found her', including her beliefs. The chain of causation was not broken by V

Question 30

What is AR

Answer 30

The physical element of the offence – actions or conduct that must be proved D did in order to be found liable for the criminal act

Question 31

What must AR be accompanied by?

Answer 31

MR

Question 32

Where do you find the AR for a specific offence?

Answer 32

If the offence is set out in an Act of Parliament, like Theft Act, the offence will be defined in the statute. Some offences were created through the common law, so we must look to the precedents – leading cases decided in the highest courts – to determine the specific AR for the offence. An example if murder

Question 33

Positive principle?

Answer 33

D must do a positive act to commit the offence

Question 34

Voluntary principle?

Answer 34

The voluntary principle ensures we do not criminalise those who are not ‘at fault’ – if you do something involuntarily, it can not be your fault. Society accepts that ‘fault’ generally lies at the heart of what makes conduct criminal and distinguishes a crime from an accident

Question 35

Hill v Baxter.

Answer 35

If a D carries out the AR of a crime involuntarily they will not be guilty of the offence

Question 36

Exceptions to the voluntary principle

Answer 36

State of affairs offences

Question 37

Positive act principle (depth)

Answer 37

The second general principle is that the AR of an offence must be a positive act The general rule is therefore that a D can not be guilty of a crime for failing to do something

Question 38

Positive act principle: omissions

Answer 38

In some circumstances a failure to act – an omission – is sufficient to form the AR of an offence. There are 6 categories of omissions and these are the ONLY exception to the positive act principle

Question 39

Omissions: Statutory offences

Answer 39

An Act of Parliament may create an offence where the AR is satisfied by an omission

Question 40

Duty to act: contractural duty

Answer 40

Job related duty

Question 41

Duty to act: special relationship

Answer 41

Gibbons v Proctor

Question 42

Duty to Act: voluntary acceptance of responsibility

Answer 42

If there is no ‘special relationship’ a D may still be held liable for failing to act if they have undertaken a role to care for another person (R v Stone & Dobinson)

Question 43

Duty of care: professional duty

Answer 43

A person may hold an occupation, or official position, that requires them to protect others. In such cases, a failure to act (omission) can form the AR of a crime. Dytham

Question 44

Duty of Care: creating a dangerous situation

Answer 44

R v Miller

Question 45

Result crime

Answer 45

By committing the AR the D must have caused a particular result - What is the ‘result’ of the AR of murder?

Question 46

Conduct crime

Answer 46

The AR is doing a specified act, it does not matter what the result of doing that act is For the motoring offence, it is irrelevant whether or not D causes an accident or any damage, they are guilty merely through their conduct of being drunk and in a car

Question 47

‘But for’ test - factual causation

Answer 47

For a D to be found guilty of a result crime, it must be proved that he factually caused the result. Would the victim have died anyway?

Question 48

R v White (But For)

Answer 48

D could not be guilty of murder as she would have died anyway, so factual causation could not be proved

Question 49

R v Pagett (But For)

Answer 49

D used his girlfriend as a human shield as he aimed and shot at a policeman. The police fired back and the girlfriend was killed. ‘But for the D using his girlfriend as a human shield, would she have died anyway?

Question 50

Causation: legal Causation

Answer 50

Significant cause = D doesn't have to be the only or even the main or substantial cause of the death, but they must be a cause. Iit is enough to show there is more than a slight or insignificant link between D’s actions and the resulting criminal R v Kimsey

Question 51

Causation: the ‘chain of causation’

Answer 51

Legal causation: there must be a direct link between the D’s actions and the criminal result, creating an unborken chain of causation that is not interrupted by a new, intervening act. Intervening act: new acts will only break the chain if they are unforeseeable and significantly independent of D’s actions. If the chain is broken, legal causation has not been proved and D can not be liable

Question 52

What can the chain of causation be broken by?

Answer 52

1. An act of a third party (ie medical) 2. An act of the victim (R v Roberts) 3. A natural but unpredictable event (‘act of God’)

Question 53

Causation: ‘thin skull’ rule

Answer 53

a D must ‘take his victim as he finds them’. If V has something unusual about their physical or mental state which makes an injury more serious, or death only likely because of a pre-existing condition, D will be liable for the more serious injury or death.