Invol MS - UAMS

Question 1

R v Lowe

Answer 1

Actus reus - ‘act’

There must be an unlawful act, it cannot be committed by an omission.

Question 2

R v Franklin

Answer 2

AR - ‘unlawful’

The act must constitute a criminal offence. It is not sufficient that the act committed is against civil law.

Question 3

R v Rodgers

Answer 3

AR - ‘unlawful’

Unlawful act can include assisting the administration of drugs

Question 4

R v Church

Answer 4

AR - ‘dangerous’

The unlawful act must be such that all sober and reasonable people would inevitably recognize that it would subject the other person to risk of harm resulting therefrom, albiet not serious harm

Question 5

R v Ball

Answer 5

AR - ‘dangerous’

The D’s intention, foresight or knowledge is irrelevant

Question 6

R v Williams

Answer 6

AR - causation

‘Thin skull rule’ - the D’s liable for all injuries, even if they are unexpectedly severe due to the V’s pre-existing vulnerabilities

Question 7

R v Carey

Answer 7

AR - causation

The physical assault was not the cause of death, the cause of death was the V running in fear,an act that a sober and reasonable person would regard as subjecting V to physical harm

Question 8

R v Lamb

Answer 8

MR

As the MR for assault was not satisfied, there was no UAMS

Question 9

UAMS plan

Answer 9

UAMS - invol MS, common law offence, requires MR and AR
Define - where D’s unlawful and dangerous act causes the death of a human being

Actus reus
- result of D’s act not omission - R v Lowe
- must be unlawful, and doesn’t need to be directed at the V or anyone else - R v Franklin, R v Rodgers
- must be dangerous, where all sober and reasonable people would realize it would subject the V to harm, not necessarily serious harm - R v Church
- it’s irrelevant if the D had a mistaken belief that what they were doing wasn’t dangerous - R v Ball
- the unlawful and dangerous act must cause death, so normal rules of causation apply - R v Williams, R v Carey
Apply…..

Causation + apply….

Mens rea
- It is only necessary to establish the MR of the unlawful act being committed. No additional MR is required for the subsequent death - R v Lamb
Apply…

Conclusion - if the D satisfies all requirements, they can be convicted of UAMS, reducing a murder conviction to one of MS