Actus Reus Flashcards
Car accident, Not voluntary, Swarm of bees
What is the first rule of AR? & case which confirms it
The act must be voluntary - if D does not will the act he cannot have committed the AR
Hill v Baxter; driver went through a stop sign and collided with another vehicle
HELD; Evidence was not suffiecent to establish that D’s act was not voluntary – Judge gave an example of an involuntary act (D distracted by a swarm of bees, therefore the act would not have been voluntary)
No omission
What is the second rule of AR and the phrase which goes with it?
AR cannot be committed by omission - failure to act as in English law there is no ‘Good Samaritan’ rule no obligation to save someone
Special relationship, Assuming care for another
What are the exceptions of failiure to act?
Duty arrising from special relationship - R v Gibbons and Proctor (Omission was criminal as they had a duty to act, daughter was starved to death)
Duty arising from the assumption of care for another - R v Stone and Dobinson (D’s assumed a duty to act when they started looking after V - omission to get help formed AR of manslaughter)
Public duty, Limit a danger of ones own making
What are some exceptions of failing to act?
Duty arising from offical position - R v Dytham
(As D had a public duty to act, his omission to intervene formed the AR of misconduct in a public office)
Duty to limit a danger of ones making - R v Miller (As D created a dangerous situation he had a duty to act - his omission formed the AR of arson
Contractual duty, Stautory duty
What are the exceptions to Omissions?
Duty arising from contract of employment - R v Pittwood (As D had a contractual duty to act, his omission to close the gate formed the AR of manslaughter)
Stautory duty to act (Failing to stop at the scene of a road traffic accident is an offence under section 170 RTA 1988)
What is meant by the Coincidence rule/Contemporaneity rule?
When the AR and MR occur that the same time
Legal principle of Fagan
Driving onto police officers foot and remaing there was part of a continuing act
Legal principle of Thabo Meli
As long as the AR and MR both occur during a series of events, they coincide and D is criminally liable
What is the third rule of AR
The act must cause a particular type of harm in fact and law
What is meant by causation in fact & cases that apply
“But for” D’s act the V would not have died or suffered injury
R v White - “But for” D’s act of poisoning his mother would she have lived? No because she died of a heart attack, not the poisoning
R v Pagett - “But for” D’s act of using his pregnant girlfriend has a human sheild against armed police, would she have lived? Yes therefore D was liable for her death in fact
What is meant by causation in law & cases that apply
Confirmed in Cheshire - Was D more than a minimal cause of death or injury?
Kimsey - There must be more then a slight or triffling link between D’s act and the death or injury
R v Smith - The stab wound was the operating and substantial cause of death
