Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Year 2 A-Level Law AQA Textbook > Involuntary manslaughter > Flashcards

Involuntary manslaughter Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards Civil Procedure 1L flashcards
1
Q

What are the two main ways of committing involuntary manslaughter?

A

1) unlawful act manslaughter-V dies as result of unlawful act.
2) Gross negligence manslaughter-V dies as result of breach of duty

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is unlawful act manslaughter?

A

Where D causes death through doing an unlawful act with necessary mens rea for unlawful act.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is gross negligence manslaughter?

A

When D causes death through a breach of duty.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What are the 4 elements of unlawful act manslaughter?

A

A) Unlawful act committed
B) Objectively dangerous-act must be objectively dangerous
C) Death-the act must cause the death
D) Mens rea-D must have mens rea for the unlawful act

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What is the maximum sentence for involuntary manslaughter?

A

Life imprisonment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What case illustrates the principle that the ‘unlawful act’ must be a criminal unlawful act?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Lamb (1967)

Facts: D pointed gun at V but V and D did not believe there was a genuine danger as it was a revolver. Therefore it was not considered an assault.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

The case of R v Lamb (1967) supports what principle?

Give brief facts.

A

Principle: That the unlawful act must be a criminal unlawful act.

Facts: D pointed gun at V but V and D did not believe there was a genuine danger as it was a revolver. Therefore it was not considered an assault.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What principle does the case of R v Lowe (1973) support?

Give brief facts.

A

Principle: The unlawful act must be ‘positive’ (as in not an omission)

Facts: D wilfully neglected baby son.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What case supports the principle that the unlawful act must be ‘positive’ in order to secure a conviction?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Lowe (1973)

Facts: D wilfully neglected baby son.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What principle does the case of R v Larkin (1943) support?

Give brief facts.

A

Principle: an objective risk of some harm
must be present for a conviction of involuntary manslaughter.

Facts: D threatened another man with sharp razer. Woman intervened and was injured herself and died. D guilty of manslaughter.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What case supports the principle that there must be an objective risk of some harm?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Larkin (1943)

D threatened another man with sharp razer. Woman intervened and was injured herself and died. D guilty of unlawful act manslaughter.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What principle does the case of R v Mitchell (1983) support?

Give brief facts.

A

Principle: That the unlawful act doesn’t have to be aimed at the true V.

Facts: D pushed man in queue who subsequently bumped into another who fell and died.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What case supports the principle that the unlawful act doesn’t have to be aimed at the true V?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Mitchell (1983)

Facts: D pushed man in queue who subsequently bumped into another who fell and died.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What principle does the case of R v JM and SM (2012) support?

Give brief facts.

A

Principle: That even ‘some harm’ foreseen not just the actual harm that happens is sufficient.

Facts: D’s got into fight with bouncers and one bouncer died from a ruptured artery. D’s charged with unlawful act manslaughter as some harm was foreseen by the reasonable person.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

The case of R v Goodfellow (1986) supports what principle?

Give brief facts.

A

Principle: That the unlawful act doesn’t have to be aimed at a person but also property.

Facts: D intentionally committed arson in his flat but unintentionally caused some deaths.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What case supports the principle that the unlawful act doesn’t have to be aimed at a person but can also include property?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Goodfellow (1986)

Facts: D intentionally committed arson in his flat but unintentionally caused some deaths.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What does the case of R v Dawson (1985) illustrate regarding the unlawful act itself?

A

That the unlawful act must have a risk of causing harm in itself not just a robbery.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What principle does the case of R v Birstow, Dunn and Delay (2013) support?

Give brief facts.

A

Principle: that if reasonable person could foresee some harm then that is sufficient for an unlawful act that would otherwise normally be harmless.

Facts: D’s robbed warehouse situated on long drive and used two vehicles-D’s ran V over. D’s charged with unlawful act manslaughter.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What case supports the principle that if some harm is reasonably foreseeable in the commissioning of any unlawful act (even ones that would otherwise be harmless) that is sufficient for a conviction of manslaughter.

Give brief facts.

A

R v Birstow, Dunn and Delay (2013)

Facts: D’s robbed warehouse situated on long drive and used two vehicles-D’s ran V over. D’s charged with unlawful act manslaughter.

20
Q

What principle does the case of R v Williams and Davis (1992) support?

Give brief facts.

A

Principle: novus actus interveniens

Facts: V jumped out of D’s car at 30mph. No evidence was found that D’s were attempting to rob V. D’s not guilty of manslaughter.

21
Q

What case is an example of a novus actus interveniens?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Williams and Davis (1992)

Facts: V jumped out of D’s car at 30mph. No evidence was found that D’s were attempting to rob V. D’s not guilty of manslaughter.

22
Q

What principle does the case of R v Kennedy (2007) support?

Give brief facts.

A

Principle: that a V self-injecting a noxious substance supplied by D does NOT constitute an act on the part of D.

Facts: D prepared a syringe of heroine and passed to V. V self-injected and died. conviction of manslaughter quashed due to novus actus interveniens on the part of the V.

23
Q

What case supports the principle that D self-injecting a noxious substance supplied by D does not constitute an act on the part of D?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Kennedy (2007)

Facts: D prepared a syringe of heroine and passed to V. V self-injected and died. conviction of manslaughter quashed due to novus actus interveniens on the part of the V.

24
Q

What principle does the case of DPP v Newbury (1976) support?

Give brief facts.

A

Principle: D need only have the mens rea for the unlawful act and does not need to foresee harm.

Facts: D’s were 2 teenage boys who pushed stone onto railway track killing train driver. D’s convicted of unlawful act manslaughter.

25
Q

What case supports the principle that D need only have the mens rea for the unlawful act and does not need to foresee harm?

Give brief facts.

A

DPP v Newbury (1976)

Facts: D’s were 2 teenage boys who pushed stone onto railway track killing train driver. D’s convicted of unlawful act manslaughter.

26
Q

What is gross negligence manslaughter?

A

Where D negligence causes death of V.

27
Q

What type of manslaughter is the case of R v Adomako (1994)?

Give brief facts.

A

Gross negligence manslaughter.

Facts: D was an anaesthetist on duty during a surgery and negligently allowed the oxygen tube to become unattached killing the V.

28
Q

What case is an example of gross negligence manslaughter?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Adomako (1994)

Facts: D was an anaesthetist on duty during a surgery and negligently allowed the oxygen tube to become unattached killing the V.

29
Q

What are the four elements to a gross negligence manslaughter conviction set out by the house of lords following the findings in the case of R v Adomako (1994)

A

A) Duty of care-must exist
B) Act or omission in breach of that duty
C) Death-which causes death
D) Gross negligence-must amount to gross negligence

30
Q

What civil case does the principles of negligence come from and which are applied IOT find a duty of care?

Give brief facts.

A

Caparo v Dickman (1990)

Facts: Company takeover of another company but finds the accounts are even worse than stated.

31
Q

Give an example case of a breach of duty of care IOT apply it to a question of gross negligence manslaughter.

Give brief facts.

A

R v Singh (1999)

Facts: D was a landlord and faulty gas fire caused death of tenants. D owed a duty to manage the property properly.

32
Q

How did the verdict in R v Wacker (2003) differ from the rules in civil law?

Give brief facts.

A

The V’s were doing something illegal and if it had been a civil case wouldn’t have been allowed to claim.

Facts: V’s were illegal migrants who were stored by D in an air tight container. D charged with gross negligence manslaughter.

33
Q

What case demonstrated circumstances where the supply of a noxious substance can create a state of affairs that can constitute gross negligence manslaughter?

What are the conditions?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Evans (2009)

Facts: D supplied drugs to V who self injected. But D was aware of risk to V life and neglected to do anything.

Conditions are: D is aware of risk to V AND

1) D supplied
2) D had relationship
3) Joint enterprise
4) Duty of care-was voluntarily assumed by D

34
Q

What does the case of R v Evans (2009) demonstrate regarding the liability of someone supplying drugs to a V who dies?

Give brief facts.

A

That supply of drugs can constitute gross negligence manslaughter (even if self injected) IF-
D was aware of risk to V AND
1) D supplied
2) D had relationship
3) Joint enterprise
4) Duty of care-was voluntarily assumed by D

Facts: D supplied drugs to V who died. D was aware of risk to V and was shown to have voluntarily assumed a duty of care.

35
Q

What case gives the explanation for ‘gross’ negligence?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Misra (2004)

Facts: D’s were doctors who were caring for V who died of infection that they failed to identify. Gross negligence manslaughter.

36
Q

The case of R v Misra (2004) gives the explanation for what element of involuntary manslaughter?

A

‘Gross’ negligence

37
Q

What is ‘gross’ negligence?

A

When the negligence is 1) serious enough to be more than trivial and 2) is serious enough to endanger life.

38
Q

What case established the three part test?

Give brief facts.

A

Caparo v Dickman (1990)

Facts: C conducted corporate take over of D business but found published accounts were not accurate.

39
Q

Caparo v Dickman (1990) established what?

A

The three part test.

40
Q

What is the three part test for establishing a duty of care.

A

1) Damage or harm reasonably foreseeable?
2) Proximity of relationship?
3) fair, just and reasonable to impose a duty?

41
Q

What is the mens rea for gross negligence manslaughter?

A

D’s behaviour creates an obvious risk (the risk doesn’t have to be known by the D)

42
Q

What case fist explained the need for ‘gross’ in gross negligence?

A

R v Bateman (1925)

Facts: Doctor who did everything he understood to correctly deliver a baby was not guilty when a patient died after childbirth.

43
Q

R v Bateman (1925)

A

First explanation of ‘gross’ in gross negligence.

Facts: Doctor who did everything he understood to correctly deliver a baby was not guilty when a patient died after childbirth.

44
Q

Juries not consistent in finding a ‘gross’ negligence on the part of D.

A

R v Finlay (2001)

Facts: scout who died whilst mountaineering with a scout instructor. Not guilty.

45
Q

R v Finlay (2001)

A

Juries not consistent in finding someone to be ‘grossly’ negligent.

Facts: scout who died whilst mountaineering with a scout instructor. Not guilty.

46
Q

What is the meaning of ‘gross’ in gross negligence and what case summarised it?

A

Obvious risk of death-CPS won’t prosecute for anything less.

Misra (2004)

47
Q

Development on the law of ‘gross’ in gross negligence.

A

1) Bateman (1925)-Introduced
2) Adomako (1994)-Unclear, risk to life or in general
3) Finlay (2001)-Inconsistency in jury verdicts
4) Misra (2004)-Summarises the law.

Year 2 A-Level Law AQA Textbook (18 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions