Law - Actus Reus
- Created by: ellieleyland
- Created on: 16-03-18 11:55
View mindmap
- Actus Reus
- Can be an act, omission or state of affairs
- Conduct and consequence crimes
- Conduct - The AR is the prohibited conduct itself
- e.g under s5a of the Road Traffic Act 1988, drink driving is a criminal offence. No consequence is required e.g causing an accident
- Consequence - The AR must result in a consequence
- e.g under s47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, there must be a common assault but this must cause ABH e.g a broken nose
- Marchant and Muntz 2003 - V impaled himself on D's vehicle with spikes. D wasn't convicted as there was no act of dangerous driving.
- Conduct - The AR is the prohibited conduct itself
- The physical element of a crime
- State of Affairs cases
- In some rare cases, a D has been convicted even though they didn't act volunrarily
- R v Larsonneur - Was forcibly removed from Ireland to UK. Was arrested in UK for not having permission to enter. Convicted as it was a state of affairs crime.
- R v Winzor - Drunk man was taken from hospital to the road outside then arrested for being drunk on a highway. Wouldn't have been there if police didn't take him out the hospital. Convicted anyway as it was a state of affairs crime.
- Voluntary nature of AR
- The act or omission must be voluntary on behalf of the defendant.
- Hill v Baxter - Court gave examles of where a driver could not be said to be doing the act voluntary e.g losing control because he had a heart attack while driving
- Mitchell - D punched man causing him to fall back into an 89 y/o woman. Woman fell over and died of her injuries. D was convicted of unlawful manslaughter. Man who had been punched wasn't liable for any criminal act.
- Generally in criminal law there must be some element of fault on the part of the defendant.
- Involuntariness - An act needs to be voluntary for liability in criminal law, unless there is a state of affairs crime.
- Omissions as AR
- Statutory duty
- Some statutes create situations where an omission will give rise to criminal liability
- e.g s1 Children and Young Persons Act 1933 - wilfully neglecting a child
- Contractual duty
- Criminal law imposes a duty to act under a contract of employment if not doing so is likely to endanger lives e.g members of the emergency services
- R v Pitwood - Pitwood was employed by a railway company to operate the level crossing gate. Left the gate open one day and a man was killed. Convicted of manslaughter as he as he had a contractual duty to protect the public which he omitted to do.
- A duty because of a relationship
- Some people have a special relationship recognised by the law e.g parents under a duty to take care of their children
- R v Gibbins and Proctor - Man and woman living together starved the man's child deliberately and it died. Found guilty of murder as the man had a duty as the parent and the woman had an assumed duty.
- Some people have a special relationship recognised by the law e.g parents under a duty to take care of their children
- A duty which has been taken on voluntarily
- A duty will arise if someone agrees to take responsibility for someone else e.g caring for someone old
- R v Stone and Dobinson - D took in Stone's sister with anorexia to look after her but she died. Stone owed a duty as her sister and Dobinson had voluntary taken on a duty so were guilty of manslaughter
- A duty will arise if someone agrees to take responsibility for someone else e.g caring for someone old
- A duty through one's official position
- Dytham - D was a police officer on duty. Saw a man being kicked to death and didn't intervene. Convicted of misconduct in a public place as he didn't perform his duty
- A duty which arisis bc the D has set a chain of events
- Miller - D fell asleep smoking, woke up to see his mattress on fire, went back to sleep without trying to put it out and was convicted of arson.
- Duty of doctors
- If a doctor stops treating a patient in their best interest, it isn't an omission that can form the AR.
- Airdale NHS trust v Bland - Court tuled the doctors could stop feeding Bland even though it would mean he'd die as it was held to be in his best interest
- Statutory duty
Comments
No comments have yet been made