Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
30 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
- 3rd side (hint)
|
Franklin |
Facts: LP: Unlawful Act must be a crime and could not be a civil wrong |
Posh people do..... |
|
|
R V Lamb |
Facts: kids and gun D must commit an unlawful act + unlawful act cannot be established if defendant did not intend the unlawful act |
Lambs r young sheep.... case with the kids n guns.... |
|
|
R v Lowe |
Facts: LP: CA held an omission was not sufficient for unlawful act manslaughter. There has to be an unlawful act. |
LOW intelligence |
|
|
R v Mitchell |
Facts: fight in post office queue, led to old lady falling over and getting injured LP: CA held unlawful act does not need to be aimed at the victim |
Phil Mitchell is type of person who would punch an old lady |
|
|
R v Goodfellow |
Facts: defendant set house on fire, family inside died as a result LP: CA held unlawful act that caused death can be aimed at property |
Goodfella pizza = poor people food = pizza burns easily |
|
|
R v Church |
Lawful act must be dangerous ‘would a reasonable and sober man have recognised the risk of some harm to the victim, not even serious harm’ |
|
|
|
R v Ball |
defendant loaded a live gun with what he thought was blanks LP: the reasonable person does not make unreasonable mistakes. |
Mad as balls !! Gun + unreasonable mistakes |
|
|
R v Carey |
affray (in this case) was not an objectively dangerous act (conviction for involuntary manslaughter was quashed) |
|
|
|
R v Dawson |
the unlawful and dangerous act must expose the victim to the risk of some physical harm. Emotional stress or shock would not be sufficient |
People Shut the door when they’re EMOTIONAL |
|
|
R v Watson |
Once the defendant became aware of the victims age and frailty, the act of burglary became a dangerous one. A reasonable and sober person would have realised the burglary risked causing some physical harm to the elderly, frail man. |
WATTT? whattt? old people can’t hear properly |
|
|
R v Pagett - rules of causation |
Facts: defendant fired at police, police returned fire and killed girlfriend The court held that BUT FOR the defendants actions, they would not have died. Key case for factual causation |
|
|
|
R v Kimsey |
Legal causation D’s acts must be more than a minimal contribution to the consequence |
|
|
|
R v Pagett - intervening acts |
Was the action of the 3rd party a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the defendants act |
|
|
|
R v Smith |
Negligent medical treatment will not break the chain of causation if the original wound is still occurring at the time of the death Pagett - “operating and substantial” |
|
|
|
R v Cheshire |
Intervening medical treatment could only break the chain of casualties if it was so independent of the defendants act and so potent in causing the death, that the jury regard the defendants acts as irrelevant |
|
|
|
R v Jordan |
Facts: victim was given antibiotics by doctors when they knew he was allergic to them and died LP: Treatment that is palpably wrong will break the chain of causation |
|
|
|
R v Roberts |
LP: the actions of the victim are not ‘daft and unexpected’ then the chain will not be broken |
|
|
|
R v Marjoram |
LP: if the reaction of the victim is a reasonably foreseeable one then it will not break the chain of causation |
|
|
|
R v Blaue |
Facts: Jehovah’s Witness LP: The rule that you must take your victim as you find him includes religious beliefs |
|
|
|
R v Cato |
LP: the unlawful act was maliciously administering a noxious substance, therefore the unlawful act caused the death of the victim |
|
|
|
R v Kennedy |
HOL held self injection of drugs breaks the chain of causation and so long as the victim is a fully informed adult making a voluntary decision to self inject then the supplier of the drugs cannot be guilty |
|
|
|
DPP v Newbury and Jones |
FACTS: Kids threw stone onto train track LP:MR required for voluntary manslaughter is the MR for the original unlawful act. It is not necessary to prove the defendant knew the act was unlawful and dangerous or to foresee a risk of harm |
|
|
|
What is element 1 of unlawful act manslaughter |
D must commit an unlawful act |
|
|
|
Unlawful act (5) |
There must be an unlawful act - lamb Cannot be civil wrong- franklin Cannot be an omission - lowe Does not need to be aimed at V - mitchell Can be aimed at property - goodfella |
|
|
|
AR of assault |
to cause v to apprehend immediate unlawful force |
|
|
|
what is the 2nd element of manslaughter |
Unlawful act must be objectively dangerous |
|
|
|
Test for dangerousness was established in what case |
Church |
|
|
|
Test for dangerousness |
Would a reasonable and sober person have foreseen the risk of serious harm to the victim, albeit not serious harm |
|
|
|
What kind of test is the test for dangerousness |
Objective |
|
|
|
two cases about old guys |
Dawson watson |
|
