unlawful act manslaughter

Question 1

What is unlawful act manslaughter?

Answer 1

Unlawful act manslaughter is a type of involuntary manslaughter, also known as constructive manslaughter.

Question 2

What does UAM mean?

Answer 2

It is where an unlawful killing has taken place, and the defendant lacks the mens rea for murder.

Question 3

How many elements must the prosecution prove of UAM for the AR?

Answer 3

The prosecution must prove 4 elements of unlawful act manslaughter:

Question 4

What does it mean by an unlawful act?

Answer 4

The act must be a positive act and a criminal offence and not a civil wrong.

Question 5

Which case law held that a civil wrong is not enough for constructive manslaughter.

Answer 5

R v Franklin.

Question 6

What other acts are considered as unlawful? Back with case law.

Answer 6

Unlawful acts can include assault as in R v Mitchel, supplying and administering substances such as in R v Cato.

Question 7

What does it mean by dangerous?

Answer 7

The unlawful act should be objectively dangerous.

Question 8

Which case confirmed the dangerous rule?

Answer 8

Newsbury and Jones where the defendants were being reckless for throwing stones onto a passing train.

Question 9

What did R v Church rule?

Answer 9

It states that a ‘reasonable and sober man must see that some risk of harm could be caused’ for it to be seen as dangerous.

Question 10

What case law shows that the sober man did not see a defect as there was no risk of physical harm to the victim?

Answer 10

R v Dawson.

Question 11

Which case law did a sober see the vulnerability?

Answer 11

R v Watson.

Question 12

What does it mean by a positive act?

Answer 12

The act must be a positive act and not an omission.

Question 13

What did R v Lowe show?

Answer 13

It showed that an omission will not suffice.

Question 14

What did R v Goodfellow rule?

Answer 14

The positive acr need not be aimed at the victim.

Question 15

What happened in R v Goodfellow?

Answer 15

The unlawful act was directed against property as the defendant set fire to his house.

Question 16

What does it mean by to cause death?

Answer 16

In order for the defendant to be liable, they must have caused death.

Question 17

How is death proven?

Answer 17

To establish this, the ‘but-for test’ (R v Pagett) for factual causation and the ‘more than minimal’ test (R v Kimsey) for legal causation is used.

Question 18

What is required for the chain of causation?

Answer 18

The chain of causation is required to be intact so acts of a third party, the victim’s own act or an unpredictable event must not intervene.

Question 19

What is the thin skull rule?

Answer 19

The thin skull rule is where the defendant must take the victim as found as in R v Blaue.

Question 20

What happens if the victim self-injects after being supplied with drugs?

Answer 20

R v Kennedy and R v Dalby shows that if you supply drugs and the victim self-injects, it breaks the chain of causation, and the defendant is not liable.

Question 21

What did the case of R v Cato show?

Answer 21

However, the case of R v Cato held where you supply and administer a drug substance and the person dies, you are guilty of manslaughter.

Question 22

What is the MR for UAM?

Answer 22

In order to be held liable, the defendant must have the mens rea required for the unlawful and dangerous act.

Question 23

What did R v Lamb rule?

Answer 23

They do not require any mens rea that shows they intended or foresaw a risk of death.

Question 24

What case shows that the defendant does not need to intend actual death as he satisfied the mens rea to commit the unlawful act?

Answer 24

R v Goodfellow.

Question 25

What happens if there is transferred malice and what case shows this?

Answer 25

The transferred malice rule also applies to constructive manslaughter, so, the unlawful act does not need to be aimed at the victim as in R v Mitchell.