Case Law

Front 1

Pittwood

Back 1

Contractual duty. Gatekeeper left gate open, car crashed into train and driver died. Gatekeeper liable for manslaughter.

Front 2

Miller

Back 2

Creating a dangerous situation. Falls asleep with cigarette, wakes and mattress is on fire, leaves the room.

Front 3

Gibbins and Proctor

Back 3

Special relationships. Man, mistress and his daughter, they fail to feed her and she dies.

Front 4

Stone and Dobinson

Back 4

Voluntary duty. Stones sister lived with them, she was mentally ill and stopped eating. They failed to get medical help and she died.

Front 5

Dytham

Back 5

Official position. Police officer witnessed a man being beaten to death and failed to summon help and drove off.

Front 6

White

Back 6

Factual causation. Put cyanide in D's drink, D had a heart attack before tea was drank. "but for" V's actions D still would have died.

Front 7

Kimsey

Back 7

Legal causation. High speed car race, D lost control of car and other driver died. More than a slight or trifling link.

Front 8

Pagett

Back 8

Act of 3rd party. D holds pregnant girlfriend hostage, used her as human shield when police shoot. D breaks chain of causation as "reasonably foreseeable" they would shoot.

Front 9

Cheshire

Back 9

Medical treatment. V shot, given care in hospital and died of rare complications. Negligence on the hospitals part only breaks the chain if its a "significant contribution".

Front 10

Jordan

Back 10

Medical treatment exceptions. Stab victims healing in hospital when doctors give wrong injection, victim dies. Treatment was "palpably wrong".

Front 11

Roberts

Back 11

Victims own contribution. V got in D's car, D drove off and attempted to sexually assault V, V jumped out of the car with mild injury. V's actions weren't "daft or unexpected" as they were reasonably foreseeable.

Front 12

Kennedy

Back 12

Victims own contribution. D supplies herion to V who dies. V voluntarily took the drug and broke the chain of causation with his own actions.

Front 13

Blaue

Back 13

"take the victim as you find them". Stab victim refuses transfusion because of religious beliefs and dies. Stab wound was the operating and substantial cause of death.

Front 14

Dudley and Stephens

Back 14

"necessity is no defence". Sailors lost at sea, one ill member is killed, stabbed, and eaten for the other to survive.

Front 15

Malcherek

Back 15

Medical treatment. Stabbed his wife, life support was switched off, doesn't break the chain of causation.

Front 16

Steel

Back 16

Medical treatment. Assaults and beats his wife, life support gets turned off, there's not break in the chain of causation.

Front 17

Williams

Back 17

Victims own contribution. V got in D's car, D 'tried' to steel V's wallet so V jumped out of the car. "daft and unexpected" actions break the chain of causation.

Front 18

Mohan

Back 18

Direct intention. D driving car and got called over, he accelerated at the police officer. Direct intention as it was his main aim to harm the police officer.

Front 19

Moloney 1985

Back 19

Indirect intention. D and stepfather were drunk and raced to load a gun. Stepfather get shot and died. Conviction was quashed as foresight of consequences is only evidence and not intention itself.

Front 20

Hancock and Shankland 1986

Back 20

Indirect intention. Minors dropped a concrete block off a bridge and it hit a taxi. Overruled Moloney as the word "probable" was needed as the definition was misleading.

Front 21

Nedrick 1986

Back 21

Indirect intention. D poured paraffin in a letter box and set it alight. A child inside the house died. Substituted to manslaughter as consequences must be of "virtual certainty"

1. How probable was the consequence from D's voluntary act?

2. Did D Foresee the consequences?

Front 22

Woollin 1998

Back 22

Indirect intention. D was angry and threw his baby towards the pram, baby hit the wall and died.

Court will infer if;

The consequence is a virtual certainty of the act or D knows that its a virtually certain consequence.

Front 23

Matthew and Alleyne 2003

Back 23

Indirect intention. D's pushed V into a river knowing he couldn't swim. The saw him head to shore but didn't stay and he died.

D's appreciation of death as a virtual certainty doesn't constitute the intention of murder (intentions can be inferred from it)

Front 24

Cunningham 1957

Back 24

Recklessness. D broke the gas meter to steel money, gas leaked into prospective mother-in-laws house and her life became endangered. Subjective recklessness is D foresaw the risk and took it anyways.

Front 25

Fagan V Metro police commisioner

Back 25

The continuing act. D drove on police man's foot, when made aware he rufused to move. Driving on and staying there was a continuous act and as long as MR was present at some point he was guilty.

Front 26

Thabo Meli

Back 26

A series of events. D beat up a man and though he was dead, so he threw him off a cliff. MR formed for the first act continued over a series of events and the consequence days later.

Front 27

Church

Back 27

A series of events. D and V having intercourse in D's van, the got into a fight and D knocked V unconscious and believed she was dead. He threw her in a river where she drowned. MR continued over a series of events.

Front 28

Mitchell

Back 28

Transfered malice. D jumped a queue and an elderly man challenged him, D shoved the man who knocked over a elderly lady, she broke her leg and died. MR could be transfered from the intended victim to actual victim as the crime was the same.

Front 29

Gnango

Back 29

Transfered malice. V was walking through a car park where Gnango and A were firing at each other. V got shot by A's gun, A went missing. Gnango was charged with murder as his participation meant he was also guilty under transfered malice.

Front 30

Latimer

Back 30

Transfered malice. D got into a fight with another man, he removed his belt to hit the man but it hit a women behind him. MR transfered from intended victim to innocent bystander.

Front 31

Pharmaceutical society of GB V Storkwain ltd

Back 31

Strict liability. D was charged for supplying certain drugs without prescription (forged). Despite D not knowing the were forged they had still supplied drugs without prescription.

Front 32

Sweet V Parsley

Back 32

Presumption of MR. D let her students in her home where they smoked cannabis without her knowing. Convicted by magistrates, she was not guilty as the presumption of MR was required and it hadn't bee rebutted.

Front 33

Blake

Back 33

Strict liability. Pirated radio broadcasts interfering with emergency channels.

Front 34

London Borough of Harrow V Shah

Back 34

Strict liability. Selling lottery ticket to underage child, liable even though staff had been trained to check ID.

Front 35

Gammon V AG for Hong Kong

Back 35

Strict liability. D's liable when a building collapsed that they were working on, the company was unaware that plans weren't being followed.

Front 36

Callow V Tillstone

Back 36

Strict liability. Butcher convicted of selling unfit meat despite it being professionally declared safe. Cases like this ensure control standards are kept as high as possible.

Front 37

Howells

Back 37

Strict liability. D's conviction for failing to obtain a firearms certificate was upheld despite D believing it was an antigue and therefore didn't need one.

Front 38

Alphacell V Woodward

Back 38

Strict liability. Paper making company's overflow was blocked and it was leaking and polluting a river. Despite regular inspections and maintenance, they were guilty and fined. Encourages greater vigilance in business.

Front 39

R V G

Back 39

Strict liability. 15 Yr old convicted of raping a 12 Yr old despite him believing she was 15 and gave consent. Mental element of the crime under section 5 states that penetration must be intentional but there is not requirement that the accused must know the other person is under 13. This policy of legislation is to protect children.