Richardson
- Created by: ashleighhodgkinson_16
- Created on: 22-03-16 19:57
View mindmap
- Richardson
- Link case
- Clarence 1888: fraud does not negate consent if it deceives the Vicitim
- Attorney General Ref No.6: Not guilty of an assault if the victim has consented to it
- COMMON LAW V LEGISLATURE: COA argued that they must consider the viewpoint that common law had developed as far as possible without the implementation of legislature
- Unwritten law was unsettled, despite an early opportunity to amend, the changes have still not been made
- Guilty after the judge had ruled against a defence of submission: they had continue to practice despite the disqualification.
- "identity encompasses other matters, whole identity and that includes, in this particular case, a qualification to practice"
- Appelants conduct was that complainant had consented to the treatment.
- Resulted in a civil claim for damages, but there was no basis for criminal liability under OAPA
- the prosecution argued that there is no distinction between unqualified and suspended dentist on basis there was a mistake to the identity of D
- Common assault element to both cases: consent had been negatived - nature of the mistake is relevant: reject the submission
- Link case
Similar Law resources:
Teacher recommended
Comments
No comments have yet been made