Fatal - legal principle Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Lord Coke (1797)

A

Defined Murder: The unlawful killing of a reasonable person in being under the queen’s peace (with malice aforethought)

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

R v Vickers (1957)

A

Intent to cause GBH is enough for men’s rea of murder

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

Attorney-General’s Reference [No. 3 of 1994] (1997)

A
  1. A foetus is not a ‘reasonable person in being’
    Violence towards a foetus which causes harm
    after birth may be considered criminal
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

R v Byrne (1960)

A

Defined abnormality of mind as: ‘a state of mind so different from that of an ordinary human being that the reasonable man would term it abnormal.’

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

R v Lloyd (1967)

A

For diminished responsibility, ‘substantial impairment’ does not mean total, nor trivial or minimal – it is something in between.

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

R v Golds (2016)

A

For diminished responsibility, ‘substantial impairment’ must be more than trivial, but not every case that is more than trivial will meet the standard of substantial

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

R v Dietshcmann (2003)

A

Intoxication AND abnormality of functioning may constitute diminished responsibility (adjustment disorder)

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

R v Wood (2008)

A

Alcohol Dependency Syndrome (ADS) can constitute an abnormality of mental functioning

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

R v Stewart (2009)

A

Set out a 3-stage test for ADS as a cause of abnormality

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

R v Dowds (2012)

A

Voluntary intoxication alone cannot constitute diminished responsibility

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

R v Jewell (2014)

A

Loss of Control: The defendant must have ‘lost it’ or ‘snapped’ – acting out of character is not always enough

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

R v Ward (2012)

A

Loss of control: Fear of violence can be toward another, not necessarily V

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

R v Dawes (2013)

A

Loss of Control
1. Sexual infidelity alone is not a trigger

OR

  1. Fear of serious violence is not viable
    where D instigated the violence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

R v Zebedee (2012)

A

Qualifying trigger must:
a) Constitute circumstances of extremely grave character

AND

b) D must have a justifiable sense of being wronged

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

R v Hatter (2013)

A

Breakdown of a relationship not usually a qualifying trigger (extremely grave character) for Loss of Control

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

R v Bowyer (2013)

A

A sense of being seriously wronged cannot exist where D initiates an offence. (Loss of Control)

17
Q

R v Clinton (2012)

A

Sexual infidelity alone is not a trigger but can be considered where it forms an essential part of context where other triggers also exist. (Loss of Control)

18
Q

R v Asmelash (2013)

A

Voluntary intoxication cannot form part of D’s circumstances when considering a defence of loss of control

19
Q

R v Lamb (1967)

A

A complete criminal act must take place for unlawful act manslaughter to be proven

20
Q

R v Lowe (1973)

A

Omissions cannot constitute an ‘act’ under unlawful act manslaughter.

21
Q

R v Larkin (1943)

A

Unlawful Act Manslaughter: The unlawful act must be dangerous according to an objective test.

22
Q

R v JM & SM (2012)

A

Unlawful Act Manslaughter: Enough that a reasonable person would foresee some harm.

23
Q

R v Goodfellow (1986)

A

Unlawful Act Manslaughter: The act can be against property provided that the reasonable person would foresee the risk of some harm.

24
Q

R v Watson (1989)

A

Unlawful Act Manslaughter: where D is aware of V’s frailty & risk of harm, D will be liable.

25
Q

R v Bristow, Dunn and Delay (2013)

A

Unlawful Act Manslaughter: Burglary not usually considered dangerous, but will depend on circumstances.

26
Q

R v Cato (1976)

A

Unlawful Act Manslaughter: Injecting V with drugs which lead to death can constitute UAM.

27
Q

R v Dalby (1982)

A

Unlawful Act Manslaughter: Supplying illegal drugs but not administering – unlawful act but not what causes death.

28
Q

R v Newbury & Jones (1976)

A

Unlawful Act Manslaughter: D must have men’s rea for unlawful act but doesn’t need to realise act is unlawful or dangerous

29
Q

R v Singh (1999)

A

Gross Negligence Manslaughter: A duty of care can be contractual. (Landlord)

30
Q

R v Litchfield (1998)

A

Gross Negligence Manslaughter: A duty of care can be contractual (Boat)

31
Q

R v Wacker (2002)

A

Gross Negligence Manslaughter: A duty of care can be taken on voluntarily

32
Q

R v Bateman (1925)

A

Gross Negligence Manslaughter: Negligence alone is not enough, the negligence must be gross

33
Q

R v Misra and another (2004)

A

Gross Negligence Manslaughter: For the negligence to be gross, the jury must decide whether the defendant’s conduct was seriously negligent in relation to the risk of death.