Gross Negligence Manslaughter

Question 1

Definition of GNM.

Answer 1

Established in R v Adamako the prosecution must prove; D owed a duty of care to V and this was breached and caused the death and that it was so bad is would be considered ‘gross’.

Question 2

What is duty of care established through?

Answer 2

Robinson approach if there is a pre-existing duty of care e.g. doctors/ patients teacher/ student.

Question 3

What are the standards that the D can be held to?

Answer 3

-Reasonable man on the London Underground
-learners are held to the standard of the reasonable experienced person in that activity (Nettleship v Western)
-professional is held to the standard of the reasonable and competent body within that field of expertise. Bolam principle expanded to the Montgomery rule.

Question 4

What must the risk of death be?

Answer 4

It must be clear, present, unambiguous and serious (much more than minimal), and reasonably foreseeable that death will occur.

Question 5

What is factual causation?

Answer 5

‘But for’ test - r v Pagett

Question 6

What is legal causation?

Answer 6

De minimus principle - must be more than minimal/ trivial contribution to V death. No breaks in the chain of causation. R v Kimsey.

Question 7

What is Novus Actus Interveniens?

Answer 7

Intervening act;
Act of V (Cheshire)
Act of a 3rd party - render D’s original act so independent
Medical negligence - must be palpably wrong (Jordon)
Act of god - unforeseen weather related.

Question 8

What is the Thin Skull Rule?

Answer 8

D must disregard any underlying medical issues. (R v Blaue).