Cases of Criminal Law

?
An Involuntary action does not form the actus reus of a crime
Hill v Bacter
1 of 36
Here a contractual duty created criminal liability for an omission when the defendant failed to act as required
Pittwood
2 of 36
Here a person's public position created liability for an omisssion
Dytham
3 of 36
The defendant's failure to minimise harm, caused by a dangerous situation he had created
Miller
4 of 36
a person can take on responsibility for another and create liability for an omission if they fail to fulfil the duty
Stone and Dobinson
5 of 36
There was no factual cause of death because the actual cause was natural and not affected by the defendants act
White
6 of 36
This is an unusual result of the 'but for' test but is quite logical
Pagett
7 of 36
The test here is whether the medical treatment was 'palpably wrong'
Jordan
8 of 36
Here the original act was the operating and substantial cause of the consequence
Smith
9 of 36
in this case the actual cause of death was not seen as independent of the original act, so there was legal causation
cheshire
10 of 36
when the doctors switched off the life support machine of the victim, this did not break the chain of causation
Malcherek
11 of 36
Here the victim's religious beliefs led to a refusal of a possible life saving treatment this is an example of the principle of Take your victim as you find him
Blaue
12 of 36
the victims own act was reasonable so there was causation
Roberts
13 of 36
This case is an example of direct intent
Mohan
14 of 36
Sets out the Virtual certainty Test
Woolin
15 of 36
Sets out the essential definition of subjective recklessness which is used in the mens rea of many crimes
Cunningham
16 of 36
here there was a continuing act, so there was coincidence of actus reus and mens rea when the mens rea was later formed
Fagan v MPC
17 of 36
have the mens rea formed for the first act continued over a series of acts and a consequence some days later
Thabo Meli
18 of 36
this is a good example of transferred malice to the victim through the original person attacked
Mitchell
19 of 36
this case is not one of strict liability as the House of Lords decided that the statute did not specifically exclude mens rea
Sweet v Parsley
20 of 36
This case sets out the general criteria for a crime to be a crime of strict liability
Gammon Ltd v Attorney General for Hong Kong
21 of 36
here the defendant company was guilty even though event could not be predicted. this created greater vigilence in business
Alphacell v Woodward
22 of 36
the defendant company was guilty even though all reasonable care had been taken
Smedleys v Breed
23 of 36
this is another example of the characteristics of a strict liability offence; it is not truly criminal, but is of social concern
London Borough of Harrow v Shah
24 of 36
the court decided that an assault could be by words and actions
Logdon
25 of 36
in this case there was an assault by actions alone
Smith v Chief Superintendent of Woking Police Station
26 of 36
it was decided that silence or words alone can be an assault
Ireland
27 of 36
here it was decided that touching a person's clothes can be a battery
Thomas
28 of 36
in this case it was decided that indirect force is sufficient for their to be battery
Haystead
29 of 36
this case defines the mens rea of battery
Venna
30 of 36
in this case it was decided that 'harm' in s47 of the OAPA 1861 includes physical or psychiatric injury
Chan-Fook
31 of 36
in this case it was decided that ABH can include all parts of the body including the hair
Smith
32 of 36
this case is authority for the proposition that mens rea for s47 OAPA 1861 is intention or recklessness as to assault or battery
Roberts
33 of 36
this case confirmed the mens rea for s47 OAPA 1861
Savage
34 of 36
this case explained that a wound requires breaking of both layers of skin
JCC v Eisenhower
35 of 36
in this case a collection of relatively minor injuries amounted to GBH
Brown and Stratton
36 of 36

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Here a contractual duty created criminal liability for an omission when the defendant failed to act as required

Back

Pittwood

Card 3

Front

Here a person's public position created liability for an omisssion

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

The defendant's failure to minimise harm, caused by a dangerous situation he had created

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

a person can take on responsibility for another and create liability for an omission if they fail to fulfil the duty

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Criminal law resources »