Fatal - legal principle

Question 1

Lord Coke (1797)

Answer 1

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

Question 2

R v Vickers (1957)

Answer 2

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

Question 3

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

Answer 3

1. A foetus is not a ‘reasonable person in being’
   Violence towards a foetus which causes harm
   after birth may be considered criminal

Question 4

R v Byrne (1960)

Answer 4

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.’

Question 5

R v Lloyd (1967)

Answer 5

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

Question 6

R v Golds (2016)

Answer 6

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

Question 7

R v Dietshcmann (2003)

Answer 7

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

Question 8

R v Wood (2008)

Answer 8

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

Question 9

R v Stewart (2009)

Answer 9

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

Question 10

R v Dowds (2012)

Answer 10

Voluntary intoxication alone cannot constitute diminished responsibility

Question 11

R v Jewell (2014)

Answer 11

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

Question 12

R v Ward (2012)

Answer 12

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

Question 13

R v Dawes (2013)

Answer 13

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

OR

2. Fear of serious violence is not viable
   where D instigated the violence

Question 14

R v Zebedee (2012)

Answer 14

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

AND

b) D must have a justifiable sense of being wronged

Question 15

R v Hatter (2013)

Answer 15

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

Question 16

R v Bowyer (2013)

Answer 16

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

Question 17

R v Clinton (2012)

Answer 17

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)

Question 18

R v Asmelash (2013)

Answer 18

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

Question 19

R v Lamb (1967)

Answer 19

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

Question 20

R v Lowe (1973)

Answer 20

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

Question 21

R v Larkin (1943)

Answer 21

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

Question 22

R v JM & SM (2012)

Answer 22

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

Question 23

R v Goodfellow (1986)

Answer 23

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

Question 24

R v Watson (1989)

Answer 24

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

Question 25

R v Bristow, Dunn and Delay (2013)

Answer 25

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

Question 26

R v Cato (1976)

Answer 26

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

Question 27

R v Dalby (1982)

Answer 27

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

Question 28

R v Newbury & Jones (1976)

Answer 28

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

Question 29

R v Singh (1999)

Answer 29

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

Question 30

R v Litchfield (1998)

Answer 30

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

Question 31

R v Wacker (2002)

Answer 31

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

Question 32

R v Bateman (1925)

Answer 32

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

Question 33

R v Misra and another (2004)

Answer 33

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.