Richardson 

HideShow resource information
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

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Criminal law resources »