Actus Reus

Question 1

What does Actus Reus translate as?

Answer 1

Guilty act

Question 2

List features of the Actus Reus

Answer 2

It is all the physical parts of a crime- this could be a punch, or hitting the victim with a bar etc.
It must be voluntary (they must have control of their own actions)
Every crime has its own Actus Reus which must be proved

Question 3

What is an omission?

Answer 3

A failure to act- e.g not helping someone who is drowning.

Question 4

In the UK, can you be charged with an ommision?

Answer 4

No, in the UK we have no “Good Samaritan Law”, meaning there is no legal obligation for you to help- but it is morally right to do so.

Question 5

When does the law give you a legal duty to act?

Answer 5

• Contractual duty (your job): Pitwood, failed to close level crossing gate
• Special relationship (parent/child): Gibbons + Proctor, father failed to prevent daughters starvation
• Voluntary assumption of a duty: Gibbons + Procto, father’s partner failed to feed child
• Creating a dangerous situation: Miller, homeless man set fire to mattress and moved instead of putting it out

Question 6

What is meant by the chain of causation?

Answer 6

Everything that happens between the defendant’s action to the outcome.
It must be established that the D’s action caused the outcome

Question 7

What is the factual causation?

Answer 7

But for test- but for the d’s actions, would the result have happened anyway? If the D had not done what they did, would the result have still happened?

Yes: the result would have happened anyway so the D is not the factual cause

No: the result would not have happened anyway so the D is the factual cause

Question 8

What is the key case for factual causation?

Answer 8

R v White.
D tries to poison his Mother but she dies of a heart attack before she drinks it.
Apply the but for test.
But for the D’s actions of poisoning the drink, she would have died anyway- not the factual cause.

Question 9

What is the legal causation?

Answer 9

The focus is on how much of a contribution the D has made. The D must have made a significant contribution. This means “more than a slight or trifling link, but they do have to be the main cause (of the outcome)”- Kimsey.
If the chain of causation is broken, the D is not liable.

Question 10

What are intervening acts?

Answer 10

If the chain of causation is broken, the D will no longer be held liable.
1. Victims own acts/escape attempts
(Roberts)- As long as the V’s actions are reasonable and foreseeable, the chain will not be broken.

2. Bad medical treatments
   (Cheshire)- If the original injuries inflicted by D are still an operating and substantial cause of the results, the
   chain will not be broken
3. Thin skull rule
   (Blaue)- The D must take their V as they find them, the chain will not broken
4. Acts of a third party
   (Pagett)- As long as the D has made a contribution to the result, the chain will not be broken and the D is still
   liable
5. Victim refusing medical treatment
   (Holland)- the victim is under no legal obligation to seek medical help, the chain will not be brken
6. Doctor switching off life support machines
   (Malcherick and Steel)- The chain will not be broken, the D is still liable

Question 11

Define murder

Answer 11

The unlawful killing of a human being, with the intention to kill or cause GBH.