Fatal Offences - Gross Negligence Manslaughter (involuntary Manslaughter)

Question 1

Order

Answer 1

Must be a duty of care, breach of duty, gross negligence, risk of death, causation

Question 2

There must be a duty of care

Answer 2

(Adomako) neighbour principle from (Donoghue v Stevenson), duty owed to anyone closely or directly affected by the acts or omission
pre existing (Robinson) or novel situation (Caparo)

Question 3

Pre existing

Answer 3

driver(Nettleship v Weston), doctor(Whitehouse v Jordan), sportsman(Condon v Basi), employer(Walker v Northumberland CC), policeman(Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police), Lawyer(Hall v Simons), public body(Clunis v Camden and Islington), judiciary(Sirros v Moore), fire brigade(Capital & Counties v Hampshire CC)

Question 4

Novel situation

Answer 4

Harm/damage is reasonably forseable(Kent v Griffiths)
Proximity-time,space or relationship(Bourhill v Young)
Just, fair and reasonable(Mulcahy v MOD)

Question 5

Breach of duty

Answer 5

Reasonable man test applies-D judges against the standard expected of the reasonable man doing the same activities
Courts consider what D was expected to do: (Singh)D breached duty to manage and maintain properties where a faulty gas fire caused deaths, (Litchfield)D breached duty to care to the crew on his ship which exploded due to fuel contamination, (Stone & Dobinson)failing to care for a relative, (Wacker)Failing to provide oxygen to illegal immigrants in the back of a lorry

Question 6

Gross negligence

Answer 6

So bad in all circumstances as to amount to the jury’s judgement to a criminal act or omission (Adamako)
(Singh) judge held the reasonable prudent person would have foreseen a serious and obvious risk not merely of injury but of serious injury
(Adamako) an anesthetist failed to notice an oxygen tube disconnected for 10 mins

Question 7

Risk of death

Answer 7

clear and obvious risk of death
Doctors didn’t see clear signs of blood poisoning
(Misra & Srivastava)

Question 8

Causation

Answer 8

Factual - but for Ds breach of duty V wouldn’t have died (White)
Legal Ds breach contributed to the Vs death in a more than minimal and operating and substantiating cause of Vs death (Smith)
chain of causation must not be broken by intervening acts (Cheshire)