involuntary act manslaughter- gross negligence

Question 1

what is gross negligence manslaughter?

Answer 1

a form of involuntary manslaughter committed where D is grossly negligent in breach of a duty of care towards V and this = V’s death

Question 2

can gross negligence be committed by an act or an omission?

Answer 2

can be act of omission, neither of which has to be unlawful

Question 3

what case sets out gross negligence manslaughter?

Answer 3

R v Adomako (1994)

Question 4

what are the elements of GNM?

Answer 4

set out in Adomako-

• existence of a duty of care by D to V
• breach of the duty which causes death
• gross negligence so bad as to be criminal

Question 5

act or omission?

Answer 5

can be an act or omission

Question 6

examples of duty of care?

Answer 6

R v Singh- landlord

R v Litchfield- master of ship and crew

Question 7

R v Wacker and duty of care?

Answer 7

irrelevant that V’s were parties to illegal act

Question 8

D has created a state of affairs and duty of care?

Answer 8

R v Evans- failed to call help after V overdosed, D created state of affairs by supplying drugs

Question 9

D owes duty due to relationship with V

Answer 9

R v Stone and Dobinson - owed duty to their sister, failed to help

Question 10

breach of duty causing death

Answer 10

factual matter for jury to decide, must be proved that D was in breach of duty and caused death, causation is important

Question 11

gross negligence

Answer 11

D’s negligence is not enough, it must be gross

Question 12

R v Bateman

Answer 12

explained ‘gross’ , jury must decide, having regard to the risk of death involved , conduct of D was so bad as to amount to a criminal act, omission

Question 13

what is gross negligence?

Answer 13

beyond matter of such compensation and showed such disregard for the life and safety of others as to amount to a crime

Question 14

gross negligence and jury

Answer 14

jury has to consider seriousness of breach of duty in all circumstances D was placed in when it occurred and whether it was so bad as to be criminal.
This is an increased role for jury, may not be capable of this.
could mean jury verdicts are inconsistent e.g. R v Finlay

Question 15

Risk of death

Answer 15

R v Misra and srivastava
must be an obvious risk of death, judged objectively. Crown prosecution service will not prosecute for anything less.
not sufficient to show risk of bodily injury or injury to health.

Question 16

supply of illegal drugs

Answer 16

possible that in situations where D has supplied drug to V who self-injects and dies, D could be liable for GNM
R v Dias
on basis that is a close relationship between d and v
also where drug user is vulnerable

Question 17

mens rea

Answer 17

D will be judged by their behaviour rather than state of mind, must be an obvious risk of death judged objectively so doesn’t matter if D didn’t see risk