Involuntary Manslaughter - Gross Negligence Manslaughter (GNM)

Question 1

R v Broughton (2020) - Very important

Answer 1

The elements of GNM are

(1) D owed a duty of care
(2) D breached this duty
(3) There was objectively serious and obvious risk of death at the time of the breach
(4) The breach caused Vs death
(5) The breach was so exceptionally bad it is criminal

Question 2

Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire (2018) - Very important

Answer 2

For GNM, the Caparo test doesn’t need to be used to establish a Duty of Care except in ‘Novel’ cases.

Question 3

R v Adomako (1994) - important

(2 things)

Answer 3

Whether D has breached their duty of care is established in the same way as a tort case. D’s conduct does not in itself need to be criminal, just negligent.

To be Gross Negligence there must be a serious and obvious risk of death that was reasonably foreseeable at the time of the breach. This is measured objectively; there is no need for D to have foreen the risk.

Question 4

R v Wood treatment LTD (2021) - important

Answer 4

For GNM, the prosecution must prove that the negligence caused the death sing the normal rules of legal and factual causation. If causation cannot be proved, there is no criminal liability.

Question 5

R v singh (1999) - important

Answer 5

A landlord can be liable for GNM following the death of a Tennant

Question 6

R v Litchfield (1997)

Answer 6

A ship owner can be liable for GNM following the death of a crew member

Question 7

R v Wacker (2002)

Answer 7

A lorry driver can be liable for GNM following the death of migrans being transported in the lorry.

Question 8

R v Zaman (2017)

Answer 8

A restaurant owner was found guilty of GNM after a customer died, after consuming an allergen that they warned the staff about

Question 9

R v Kuddus (2019)

Answer 9

A restaurant owner can’t be guilty of GNM if a customer died from an allergy that they didn’t warn the staff about

Question 10

R v Khan and Khan (1998)

Answer 10

A drug supplier can be liable for GNM for supplying drugs that lead to V’s death. In these cases the duty of care comes from setting a dangerous chain of events in motion.

Question 11

R v Rudling (2016)

Answer 11

A doctor misdiagnosing a patient over the phone is not enough for the ‘serious and obvious risk of death’ part of the test for GNM

Question 12

R v Rose (2017)

Answer 12

An optician failing to spot signs of a serous brain condition is not enough for the ‘serious and obvious risk of death’ part of the test in GNM