General Elements Of Liability

Question 1

What is Actus Reus

Answer 1

An act or failure to act

Question 2

What is a conduct crime?

Answer 2

Crimes that are not necessary for any consequences to be proved. For example - theft

Question 3

What are consequence crimes?

Answer 3

Crimes that must result in a consequence for example - Actus Reus to establish ABH

Question 4

Involuntary act [case]

Answer 4

R v Mitchell - the original pusher was held liable for the crime.

Question 5

What is an involuntary act?

Answer 5

Conduct that cannot be controlled because one is suffering from a physical or mental condition or is acting under duress

Question 6

There are some cases where the involuntary act is committed but the situation is a state of affairs so the defendant is still liable - what case is this referencing?

Answer 6

R v Larsonneur

Question 7

What is a state of affairs?

Answer 7

offences that criminalises a defendant being found in a particular circumstance at a particular time, irrelevant of how they got there

Question 8

Can an omission make a person guilty of an offence?

Answer 8

No usually an omission cannot make someone liable

Question 9

There are exceptions to the rule that “an omission cannot make a person guilty of an offence” there are 6 ways which are?

Answer 9

Only where there is a duty to act
1. Statutory duty
2. Contractual duty
3. Duty because of a relationship
4. Duty taken on voluntarily
5. Duty through someone official position
6. Duty because the defendant set a chain of events

Question 10

Case or statute for statutory duty

Answer 10

S. 170 of the road traffic act 1988

Question 11

Case for Contractual duty

Answer 11

R v Pittwood

Question 12

Case for a duty because of a relationship
Usually a parent-child relationship.

Answer 12

R v Gibbins and Proctor

Question 13

Case for a duty taken voluntarily

Answer 13

R v Stone and Dobinson or R v Evans

Question 14

Case for duty through ones official position

Answer 14

R v Dytham

Question 15

Case for a duty because the defendant set a chain of events

Answer 15

R v Miller
DPP v Santa-Bermudez

Question 16

Case for duty of doctors
(Discontinuance of a treatment in the best interests of the patient then it isn’t an omission)

Answer 16

Airedale NHS Trust v Bland

Question 17

What case states that the law is capable of expanding to cover more situations

Answer 17

R v Khan and Khan - “duty to summon medical assistance”

Question 18

What is strict liability

Answer 18

The defendant is liable because he has failed to do something and there is no Mens Rea needed to be proved

Question 19

What is causation?

Answer 19

The prosecution has to show that the defendants conduct was the factual cause and legal cause of the consequence.

Question 20

What test is used for factual causation and what case can you reference for the test and the opposite situation. Causa sine qua non

Answer 20

‘But for’ test - R v Pagett
Opposition of the ‘but for’ test - R v White

Question 21

What is legal causation? And the case to reference for it.
de minimus non curat lex

Answer 21

Legal causation is when the defendant can be guilty if the act is significant to the result of the consequence.
[R v Kimsey]

Question 22

Thin skull rule (legal causation)
What is it and the Case reference for it?

Answer 22

Must find victim as they are
[R v Blaue]

Question 23

What is the chain of causation? (Legal causation)

Answer 23

Where there is a direct link from defendants act to the consequence

Question 24

What breaks chain of causation? (Legal causation)
And Examples.

Answer 24

1. Act of a third party
2. Victims own act
3. Natural unpredictable events
   Example: An intervening act for example - the defendant has stabbed victim, on the way to the hospital, the ambulance carrying victim is involved in an accident causing fatal head injuries to victim.

Question 25

Case where medical treatment breaks chain of causation. (Legal causation)

Answer 25

R v Jordan

Question 26

2 Cases where medical treatment did NOT break chain of causation (legal causation)

Answer 26

1. R v Cheshire
2. R v Smith

Question 27

What case states that switching off life support machine when victim is brain dead did not break chain of causation? (Legal causation)

Answer 27

R v Malcherek

Question 28

An example where D caused V to act in a foreseeable way causing D to be liable for V’s injuries (legal causation)

Answer 28

R v Roberts

Question 29

If D causes V to react in a foreseeable way is D liable for an injury caused to V?

Answer 29

If D causes V to react in reasonable foreseeable way then injury to V will be considered to have caused

Question 30

What case states that the victims own act can break chain of causation? (If the victims act is unreasonable)

Answer 30

R v Williams and Davis.

Question 31

What is Mens Rea?

Answer 31

Mental element of an offence.

Question 32

Does strict liability require a Mens Rea if not, why?

Answer 32

Strict liability does not require a Mens Rea because it is necessary to prove.

Question 33

What is the highest levels of Mens Rea?

Answer 33

specific intention.

Question 34

What are the other main types of Mens Rea?

Answer 34

Knowledge and recklessness.

Question 35

In the case of [mohan] what did the court define specific intention as?

Answer 35

“A decision to bring about, in so far as it lies within the accused’s power, no matter whether the accused desired that consequence of his act or not.”

This shows that the defendants motive or reason for doing the act is not relevant the point is that the defendant decided to bring about the prohibited consequence.

Question 36

What is direct intent?

Answer 36

Means that D intends the specific consequence to occur

Question 37

What is oblique intent and the case for it?

Answer 37

The outcome is not necessarily the desire of the defendant and aim or purpose is different.
[hancock v shankland]

Question 38

Case for oblique intent

Answer 38

Hancock V shankland

Question 39

Does the thin skull rule break chain of causation? If not, why?

Answer 39

It does not because you must find you victim as they are