Gross negligence manslaughter and consent
- Created by: BethPilsbury
- Created on: 11-11-20 14:03
View mindmap
- Gross negligence manslaughter
- Duty of care
- Act= civil test- Caparo- industries plc V Dickman- a)reasonably foreseeable harm b) proximity between C and D in time, space and relationship c)fair and reasonable to impose duty
- Omissions= criminal test- Khan and Khan- may be criminally liable for failing to get help
- Donoghue V Stevenson- neighbour principle, must take care to avoid acts or omissions reasonably foreseeable to likely injure neighbour
- Duty where D committed a crime- Wacker- DoC established even if D was carrying out a crime
- Evans- didn’t have familiar DoC but supplying the drug is creating a dangerous situation and failing to rectify it
- Breach
- Acted a reasonable man?-obvious risk of death- Mirsa- breach of DoC must create risk of death, risk of injury is NOT enough
- Causation
- But for- White
- Legal- operating and substantial?- Kimsey
- MR
- Gross negligence- Adomako- ordinary principle of negligence apply even if D had not breached DoC
- Bateman- went beyond a mere matter of compensation between subjects and showed such disregard for life and safety of others to amount to a crime
- Lichfield- up to jury to decide if negligence is gross even if negligently endangering a ship is a statutory offence
- Duty of care
Comments
No comments have yet been made