Paper 1: involuntary manslaughter

Question 1

What is the maximum sentence?

Answer 1

Life imprisonment

Question 2

What are the two types?

Answer 2

Unlawful act manslaughter (constructive manslaughter), and gross negligence manslaughter

Question 3

Key elements of unlawful act manslaughter

Answer 3

1) The act must be unlawful
2) Which must be dangerous on an objective test
3) The act must cause the death
4) D must have the mens rea for the unlawful act

Question 4

What must be unlawful act be?

Answer 4

A crime

Question 5

franklin (1883)

Answer 5

Facts: D threw a box into the sea. The box hit and killed a swimmer
Held: Throwing the box was a civil wrong and not a crime and so D was not liable for unlawful act manslaughter

Question 6

R v Lamb (1967)

Answer 6

Facts: D and a friend were playing with a gun. Neither D nor V realised that the gun was loaded into the firing position. D pulled the trigger and killed V
Held: There was no assault as V did not know the gun was loaded and therefore could be no unlawful act manslaughter

Question 7

Church (1966)

Answer 7

• The accused’s need not be the one who foresaw the harm, but any ‘sober and reasonsable’ person
• The risk may be only ‘some harm’, not necessarily serious harm

Question 8

Larkin (1943)

Answer 8

Facts: D threatened a man with an open cut-throat razor. A woman accidentally fell on the open blade which cut her throat and killed her
Facts: The unlawful act was threatening someone with a razor which, objectively, carried a risk of some injury or harm

Question 9

Goodfellow (1986)

Answer 9

Facts: D set fire to a council flat so council would rehouse him, the fire got out of control and D’s wife, son and another person died
Held: His conviction for manslaughter was upheld. There was no requirement that the unlawful act was directed at the victims nor that it was directed at a person

Question 10

Watson (1989)

Answer 10

Facts: Two D’s threw a brick through the window of a house and broke in. D’s physically abused a frail man and then left
Held: The CA said that the act of bugulary could be ‘dangerous’ in that it became dangerous as soon as the old man’s condition would have be apparent to the reasonable man

Question 11

R v Birstow and others (2013)

Answer 11

Facts: D’s burgled a secluded farm that was located down a single track, the owner disturbed the burglars and was killed in a hit and run by accident by atheist one of the vehicles used by D’s
Held: In those circumstances, a reasonable person would recognise the risk of some harm being caused to a person intervening at night, in the dark, where there was only one route of escape. Hence, the burglary was an unlawful act which was dangerous

Question 12

Carey (2006)

Answer 12

the unlawful and dangerous act need not be the sole cause of death as it is not trivial

Question 13

Newbury and Jones (1976)

Answer 13

Facts: 2 teenaged boys pushed a piece of paving stone from a bridge on to railway, the train guard was killed
Held: Hl confirmed D could be charged with unlawful act even if he did not foresee any harm from his act, it was sufficient that the unlawful act was dangerous and D had the necessary mens rea for that act

Question 14

What is gross negligence manslaughter

Answer 14

Committed wen the defendant owes the victim a duty of care and breaches that duty which causes the death of the victim, this can be an act or an omission but does not have to be unlawful

Question 15

Adamako (1994)

Answer 15

Principle of negligence in civil law should apply in gross negligence manslaughter when asking a duty of care exists, and whether the duty has been breached

Question 16

What are the sections of gross negligence manslaughter?

Answer 16

1) Duty of care
2) Breach of duty
3) Causes the death of V
4) Gross negligence

Question 17

Donoghue v Stevenson (1932)

Answer 17

Lord Atkin created the ‘love thy neighbours’ principle: ‘you should avoid acts or omissions which are reasonably foreseeable to injure your neighbour’

Question 18

Stone and Dobinson (1977)

Answer 18

Held: Stone and Dobinson were found liable for the death of the sister as they took her on voluntarily to look after her before leaving her

Question 19

Litchfield (1998)

Answer 19

Held: D owed a duty to his crew on a contractual basis

Question 20

Singh (1999)

Answer 20

Held: a duty to manage and maintain property on a contractual basis

Question 21

Khan and Khan (1998)

Answer 21

Held: the CA quashed their conviction, but thought there could be a duty to summon medical assistance in certain circumstances, so D could be liable for failing to do so. CA said obiter that the law is capable of expanding and extending to include new duty situations

Question 22

Wacker (2002)

Answer 22

Held: safety of the victims depended upon his actions

Question 23

Willoughby (2005)

Answer 23

Held: confirmed that D and V who were complicit in a crime does not prevent duty of case as here there was a combination of being an owner of a pub, a fire for his benefit enlisting V to help which resulted in a death

Question 24

Evans (2009)- state of affairs

Answer 24

Held: both the mother and half sister were owed a duty of care. D created a state of affairs which he knows or ought reasonably to have known has become life threatening

Question 25

Evans (2009)- breach

Answer 25

D’s breached their duty as they did not get medical help, which a reasonable person would do

Question 26

R v Bateman (1925)

Answer 26

Facts: Doctor convicted of manslaughter arising of treatment of a woman in childbirth
Held: ‘It must be beyond a matter of mere compensation between subjects’ and show ‘such disregard for the life and safety of others to amount to a crime against the State and conduct deserving of punishment’

Question 27

R v Finlay (2001)

Answer 27

Held: Jury felt that D’s conduct did not show such disregard for life and safety of others so as to amount to gross negligence

Question 28

R v Edwards (2001)

Answer 28

Held: D’s ignored an obvious and serious danger and this amounted to gross negligence

Question 29

Misra and another (2004)

Answer 29

• The test for GNM involved a consideration of the risk of death
• There must be an obvious risk of death which D must consider
• D doesn’t have to foresee the risk, objectively it is there