Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Y1 LLB > Crim Cases for PQ > Flashcards

Crim Cases for PQ Flashcards

1
Q

But For Test

A

R v White

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

More than de minimis

A

R v Hughes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Natural event unforeseeable break chain

A

Harlot’s Case

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Free, deliberate, informed break chain

A

Kennedy No.2

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Extraordinary and abnormal break chain (old)

A

Empress Car

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Innocent 3P no break

A

R v Saunders & Archer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

If act for self-preservation/legal duty, no break

A

R v Pagett

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Must be so potent and independent (+ sig contribution) to break

A

R v Cheshire

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

So daft that reasonable unforeseeable to break

A

R v Roberts

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Thin skull rule

A

R v Blaue

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

If got contract got omissions liability

A

R v Pittwood

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Police got duty to help

A

R v Dytham

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

If create dangerous situation got duty to rectify

A

R v Miller

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

If create dangerous situation got duty to rectify

A

R v Evans

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Parents got duty to child

A

R v Gibbins & Proctor

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Blood relative got duty (Stone), if take in as lodger got duty (Dobinson)

A

R v Stone & Dobinson

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Friends like brothers got duty

A

R v Sinclair

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

If act is continuing then AR can coincide w MR

A

Fagan v Metropolitan Police

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

1) Virtual Certainty 2) Foresight 3) Jury entitled

A

R v Woollin

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Foresee risk + know unreasonable to take risk

A

R v G

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

MR can be transferred if AR on V + offence same

A

R v Latimer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

D aware of necessary degree risk (see R v G)

A

R v Lidar

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

1) Duty breached 2) Obvious and serious risk 3) Causation 4) Grossness

A

Adomako

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Unlawful act + all sober and reasonable people foresee risk of some harm

A

R v Church

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Knowledge of risk can be gained mid act

A

R v Watson

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Cannot premeditation, need loss of reasoning

A

R v Jewell

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Breakups usually not qualifying trigger, but take into account circumstances

A

R v Dawes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Sexual infidelity not qualifying trigger, but can evidence w others

A

R v Clinton

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Conditional battery =/= assault

A

Tuberville v Savage

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Everyday contact

A

Collins v Wilcock

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Indirect contact can

A

DPP v K

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

More than merely transient and trifling

A

R v Donovan

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

Psychiatric harm included

A

R v Dhaliwal

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

Every layer of skin broken

A

JCC v Eisenhower

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

Really serious harm

A

DPP v Smith

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

Serious psychiatric harm qualify

A

R v Burstow

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

Include transmission of disease

A

R v Dica

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

Same race can, but cannot be directed at conduct

A

R v Pal

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

Same race can, but cannot be directed at conduct

A

Cain v CPS

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

Honest belief in serious violence

A

R v Williams (Gladstone)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

Can pre-empt if honest belief

A

R v Bird

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

Objective and reasonable test + take into account heat of moment

A

R v Palmer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

Provocation no open for SD

A

R v Keane

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
44
Q

Voluntary intoxication no open for SD, unless honest belief not bc intoxication

A

R v O’grady

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
45
Q

Sadomasochistic no

A

R v Brown

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
46
Q

Branding w hot knife can (Tattooing)

A

R v Wilson

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
47
Q

Body modification no

A

R v BM

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
48
Q

Sports yes

A

R v Barnes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
49
Q

Horseplay yes

A

R v Jones

50
Q

Psychiatric conditions not taken into account

Reasonable Belief for Sexual Offences

A

R v B(MA)

51
Q

Mere submission is not consent

A

R v Doyle

52
Q

Reluctant consent is still consent

A

R v Watson

53
Q

Coercion/Economic duress = no consent

A

R v Kirk

54
Q

Grooming no vitiate but possible

A

R v Ali(Yassir)

55
Q

Drunken consent is still consent, unless completely incapable of choosing

A

R v Bree

56
Q

Earlier advance before becoming unconscious insufficient for consent

A

R v Ciccarelli

57
Q

Non-disclosure =/= deception

A

R v B

58
Q

Lying that police was telling them to sex (no s76 but s74)

A

R v Jheeta

59
Q

Deceived to masturbate online (humiliation revenge) - s76 purpose

A

R v Denovald

60
Q

Deception as to pulling out vitiate

A

R (F) v DPP

61
Q

Deception as to condom vitiate

A

R v Assange

62
Q

Deception as to gender not s76 but s74

A

R v McNally

63
Q

Undercover cop lie environmental beliefs - no vitiate

A

R v Monica

64
Q

Vasectomy not nature of act (must be directly related to sex)

A

R v Lawrance

65
Q

Switching labels = appropriation

A

R v Morris

66
Q

Trying to sell (even if unsuccessful) = appropriation

A

R v Pitham & Hehl

67
Q

Taking more money than necessary = appropriation (even if consent)

A

R v Lawrence

68
Q

Consent can still appropriate

A

R v Gomez

69
Q

Gift can still appropriate

A

R v Hinks

70
Q

Mere possession enough to give interest

A

Turner (no.2)

71
Q

Replacement with different insufficient

A

R v Velumyl

72
Q

Abandoning = no intention of permanent deprivation

A

R v Mitchell

73
Q

Objective test: standards of ordinary reasonable people with D knowledge

A

Ivey v Genting

74
Q

Dishonestly make false rep w intention to make a gain

A

R v Jeevarajah

75
Q

Force must hv direct physical contact

A

P v DPP

76
Q

Slight force sufficient

A

R v Dawson

77
Q

Theft/appropriation continuing act, so force can be afterwards

A

R v Hale

78
Q

Must enter knowing/reckless trespass

A

R v Collins

79
Q

Half body in = trespass

A

R v Brown

80
Q

Permission to enter can be exceeded when steal (knowingly exceed)

A

R v Jones & Smith

81
Q

If primary no knowledge/capacity, secondary becomes primary

A

R v Michael

82
Q

Material support (supply tools)

A

R v Bainbridge

83
Q

Need not be substantial; Jogee: no need causal link

A

R v Hussain

84
Q

Spiking = procurement = assist

A

AG Ref No.1

85
Q

Urging someone to commit a crime

Complicity

A

R v Calhaem

86
Q

Provide info/advice

A

R v Baker

87
Q

Encouragement can come in the form of pariticipation in shoot off

A

R v Gnango

88
Q

Mere presence no encourage (need positive encouragement)

A

R v Clarkson

89
Q

Mere presence can contribute to force in numbers in hostile situation

A

R v Jogee

90
Q

Reckless insufficient, must intend

Complicity

A

R v Scott

91
Q

Know essential matters

A

Johnson v Youden

92
Q

Essential matters: range of offences

A

R v Maxwell

93
Q

Essential matters: type of offence

A

R v Bainbridge

94
Q

Need unequivocal communication of withdrawal

A

R v Rook

95
Q

Not turning up insufficient withdrawal

A

R v Goodspeed

96
Q

Can withdraw sponteneously from joint enterprise

A

R v O’Flaherty

97
Q

Shared design, not similar but separate

A

R v Mehta

98
Q

Don’t need play active part in crime (eg: organiser)

A

R v Siracusa

99
Q

Don’t need intend for full crime; part is enough

A

R v Anderson

100
Q

Need to intend for crime to be carried out, motive irrelevant

A

R v Yip Chiu-Cheung

101
Q

Need to embark on crime proper

Horse race scam no claim money

A

R v Gullefer

102
Q

Need to embark on crime proper

Kidnap no kidnap yet

A

R v Geddes

103
Q

Intention for full offence/ suspicion not enough

A

R v Pace & Rogers

104
Q

Impossibility of committing offence not defence

A

R v Shivpuri

105
Q

1) Defect of reason 2) Disease of mind 3) Dunno nature/quality

A

McNaughton Rules

106
Q

Epilepsy

A

R v Sullivan

107
Q

Diabetes

A

R v Henessy

108
Q

Sleepwalking

A

R v Burgess

109
Q

Effects of tumour

A

R v Kemp

110
Q

Need to know unlawfully AND morally wrong

Insanity

A

R v Keal

111
Q

Internal cause = insane, external = non insane

A

R v Quick

112
Q

Need to foresee risk of becoming aggressive

A

R v Bailey

113
Q

Cannot for basic intent crimes

A

DPP v Majewski

114
Q

Can for specific intent (MR gone)

A

R v Lipman

115
Q

1) Avoid irreparable evil 2) No more than necessary 3) Evil inflicted not disproportionate to evil avoided

A

Re A (conjoined twins)

116
Q

Perceived threat of death/GBH

A

R v Conway

117
Q

D own reasonable belief - perceived threat?

A

R v Martin

118
Q

D act reasonably and proportionately to threat

A

R v Martin

119
Q

Sober person of reasonable firmness act like D?

A

R v Graham

120
Q

Opportunity to evade threat?

A

R v Bradford

121
Q

If threat from criminal enterprise/gang association, no duress

A

R v Z(Hasan)

122
Q

Murder no duress

A

R v Gotts

Y1 LLB (3 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions