Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Law A-LVL 👨‍⚖️ > Actus Reus (+Cases) +Causation > Flashcards

Actus Reus (+Cases) +Causation Flashcards

1
Q

What are the two general principles of AR?

A
  1. D must have done the act voluntarily
  2. D must have done a positive Act
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What 3 things can constitute an Actus Reus?

A
  1. An act
  2. An omission (failure to act)
  3. A state of Affairs
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Is there a ‘duty to be a hero’ under English law?

A

No

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Define ‘duty to be a hero’

A

One’s personal task to step up and act (not necessary)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What is a consequence crime?

A

For the offence to have been committed a certain consequence (result) must occur as a result of D’s actions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is a conduct crime?

A

A crime can be committed by the actions of the D even if there is no consequence (result) of those actions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Example of a conduct crime?

A

Speeding

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Hill v Baxter
Hint: voluntary AR

A

Examples of situations that may occur which would cause D to act involuntarily, meaning AR will not be proved

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What type of crimes are an exception to the general principle,e that the act has to be voluntary?

A

State of Affairs crimes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What are State of affairs crimes?

A

Crimes where the AR is satisfied by D being in a particular circumstance at a particular time

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Winzar v Chief Constable of Kent
Hint: State of Affairs crime

A

Being drunk on a public highway when he was removed by the police from a hospital and put back in his car parked outside. AR was satisfied despite his act not being committed voluntarily

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Can some crimes be committed by omission?

A

Yes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

R v Pitwood
Hint: omission

A

A contractual duty to act existed on the facts due to D’s employment as a railway-crossing keeper. D failed to shut the gate and V was killed by a train.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

R v Dytham
Hint: omission

A

A police officer witnessed a violent attack on V and did not intervene (occupation of being a police officer suggests he should’ve

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Which common Law duty to act was established in R v Miller?

A

D had created a dangerous situation by leaving a lit cigarette on his bed which caught fire. When he realised he left the room making no attempt to put it out or get help.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Stone and Dobbinson is an example of which common law duty to act?

A

D has taken on a voluntary duty toward the V.
Stone’s sister lived with Stone and his girlfriend. The sister died after becoming ill, S and D did not care for her. S owed her a duty of care as her sister, D was found to have taken on some caring role which amounted to a voluntary duty to act. Their failure to help her or get her help formed the AR of the crime.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Name a case that demonstrates the common law duty to act due to a special relationship between D and V

A

Gibbons and Proctor
A child’s father and his girlfriend failed to feed the child who died. They had a duty to care for V as a result of the parent and child relationship, D’s omission formed the AR of the crime.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What was the D in R v White found not guilty?

A

D was not the factual cause of V’s death, causation could not be proved.
D put poison in mother’s drink, V died of a heart attack before she could drink it all.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Factual causation test?

A

The ‘but for’ test, but for D’s actions, would V have been harmed?
In White, ‘but for’ D’s actions, the V would still have died - D not guilty

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

R v Pagett
Hint: ‘But For’

A

‘But for’ D’s actions V would not have died, factual causation was proved.
D used his girlfriend as a human shield as he fired at police, police fired back at D and killed V. D guilty of V’s manslaughter

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Factual and legal causation must be proved for which type of crime and why?

A

Consequence crime
Because it must be proved that a certain consequence (result) was caused by D.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Legal Causation Test

A

It must be proved D’s actions are more than slight or trifling (the de minimis rule) in causing the criminal result

23
Q

Legal causation in R v Kimsey?
Hint: cars

A

D & girlfriend were racing in separate cars. Girlfriend, V, died driving her car

D’s actions, despite V driving her own car, were considered to be more than trivial or trifling in causing the death of V

24
Q

What 3 things can constitute an intervening act and break the chain of causation?

A
  1. V’s own actions
  2. Actions of a third party
  3. An unforeseen natural event
25
Q

R v Cheshire Rule?
Hint: health

A

Medical treatment will only break the chain of causation where it is so independent of D’s actions that it renders D’s original act insignificant.

26
Q

R v Jordan
Hint: novus actus

A

D stabbed V but V had almost healed when doctor administered drug V was allergic to, killing V

Actions of a third party (the doctors) because original wound had almost healed and doctor’s actions were palpably wrong

27
Q

R v Williams
Hint: novus Actus

A

Ds picked up hitchhiker, V. V jumped out of moving car. There was insufficient evidence that Ds had done anything to V to cause this

D not guilty a V’s own actions were novus actus interveniens

28
Q

Thin Skull Rule?

A

You must take your victim as you find them. A V’s own frailties will not break chain of causation

29
Q

R v Blaue
Hint: thin skull

A

D stabbed V. V refused blood transfusion on religious grounds and died. D claimed V’s own actions broke chain of causation

Thin skull rule applies to religious beliefs, D had to ‘take his V as he found her’, including her beliefs. The chain of causation was not broken by V

30
Q

What is AR

A

The physical element of the offence – actions or conduct that must be proved D did in order to be found liable for the criminal act

31
Q

What must AR be accompanied by?

A

MR

32
Q

Where do you find the AR for a specific offence?

A

If the offence is set out in an Act of Parliament, like Theft Act, the offence will be defined in the statute. Some offences were created through the common law, so we must look to the precedents – leading cases decided in the highest courts – to determine the specific AR for the offence. An example if murder

33
Q

Positive principle?

A

D must do a positive act to commit the offence

34
Q

Voluntary principle?

A

The voluntary principle ensures we do not criminalise those who are not ‘at fault’ – if you do something involuntarily, it can not be your fault. Society accepts that ‘fault’ generally lies at the heart of what makes conduct criminal and distinguishes a crime from an accident

35
Q

Hill v Baxter.

A

If a D carries out the AR of a crime involuntarily they will not be guilty of the offence

36
Q

Exceptions to the voluntary principle

A

State of affairs offences

37
Q

Positive act principle (depth)

A

The second general principle is that the AR of an offence must be a positive act

The general rule is therefore that a D can not be guilty of a crime for failing to do something

38
Q

Positive act principle: omissions

A

In some circumstances a failure to act – an omission – is sufficient to form the AR of an offence. There are 6 categories of omissions and these are the ONLY exception to the positive act principle

39
Q

Omissions: Statutory offences

A

An Act of Parliament may create an offence where the AR is satisfied by an omission

40
Q

Duty to act: contractural duty

A

Job related duty

41
Q

Duty to act: special relationship

A

Gibbons v Proctor

42
Q

Duty to Act: voluntary acceptance of responsibility

A

If there is no ‘special relationship’ a D may still be held liable for failing to act if they have undertaken a role to care for another person

(R v Stone & Dobinson)

43
Q

Duty of care: professional duty

A

A person may hold an occupation, or official position, that requires them to protect others. In such cases, a failure to act (omission) can form the AR of a crime.

Dytham

44
Q

Duty of Care: creating a dangerous situation

A

R v Miller

45
Q

Result crime

A

By committing the AR the D must have caused a particular result - What is the ‘result’ of the AR of murder?

46
Q

Conduct crime

A

The AR is doing a specified act, it does not matter what the result of doing that act is

For the motoring offence, it is irrelevant whether or not D causes an accident or any damage, they are guilty merely through their conduct of being drunk and in a car

47
Q

‘But for’ test - factual causation

A

For a D to be found guilty of a result crime, it must be proved that he factually caused the result.

Would the victim have died anyway?

48
Q

R v White (But For)

A

D could not be guilty of murder as she would have died anyway, so factual causation could not be proved

49
Q

R v Pagett (But For)

A

D used his girlfriend as a human shield as he aimed and shot at a policeman. The police fired back and the girlfriend was killed.

‘But for the D using his girlfriend as a human shield, would she have died anyway?

50
Q

Causation: legal Causation

A

Significant cause = D doesn’t have to be the only or even the main or substantial cause of the death, but they must be a cause. Iit is enough to show there is more than a slight or insignificant link between D’s actions and the resulting criminal

R v Kimsey

51
Q

Causation: the ‘chain of causation’

A

Legal causation: there must be a direct link between the D’s actions and the criminal result, creating an unborken chain of causation that is not interrupted by a new, intervening act.

Intervening act: new acts will only break the chain if they are unforeseeable and significantly independent of D’s actions. If the chain is broken, legal causation has not been proved and D can not be liable

52
Q

What can the chain of causation be broken by?

A
  1. An act of a third party (ie medical)
  2. An act of the victim (R v Roberts)
  3. A natural but unpredictable event (‘act of God’)
53
Q

Causation: ‘thin skull’ rule

A

a D must ‘take his victim as he finds them’. If V has something unusual about their physical or mental state which makes an injury more serious, or death only likely because of a pre-existing condition, D will be liable for the more serious injury or death.

Law A-LVL 👨‍⚖️ (10 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions