Criminal Law- Involunary Manslaughter (Unlawful and Dangerous act M/S & Gross Negligence M/S) Flashcards

Question

explain the ratio of the case of Andrews

Answer 1

H: Ratio: CA upheld conviction for an unlawful manslaughter conviction where the initial crime was strict liability and thus required no mens rea.

Answer 2

Adomako was an anaesthetist whose patient died if lack of oxygen in an eye operation when the tube in his mouth became detached from the ventilator. The patient was paralysed by injection of a drug and an endotracheal tune was inserted for the patient to breathe by mechanics means. Disconnection occurred at 11.05 am (approx). Oxygen supply to patient ceased leading to cardiac arrest at 11.14 am. During this time A failed to notice or remedy the disconnection. A first became aware that something was amiss when an alarm sounded on the machine that monitors the patients blood pressure. 4 1/2 minutes would have elapsed between the disconnection and the alarm. The disconnection itself was not discovered until after resuscitation measures had been commenced.

Answer 3

A was found guilty of GN manslaughter. His appeal to the HL was dismissed. Lord Malkey started ‘the ordinary principles of negligence apply to ascertain whether or not D had been in breach of a duty of care towards the victim’

Answer 4

1. It can be committed by an act or omission 2. D must owe V a duty of care 3. Breach of duty by an act or omission creating a risk of death 4. Causing v’s death

Answer 5

‘Neighbour principle’ must take care to avoid acts or omissions which can be reasonable foreseen would be likely to injure your neighbour. A neighbour is a person closely and directly affected by my act that I ought reasonably to have them in contemplation

Answer 6

A) reasonably foreseeable harm? B) proximity between C and D in time / space or relationship? C) fair/ just and reasonable to impose a duty?

Answer 7

F: D’s supplied heroin to a new user who took it in their presence and collapsed. They left her alone and by the time they returned to the flat she had died if the V had received medical medical help at and stage before she had died then she would have probably lived. H: the convictions were quashed due to a misdirection but the court didn’t rule out possibility of a duty of care being owed by drug dealers

Answer 8

Creating a dangerous a situation and failing to rectify it= Miller Contractual duty= pittwood Parental duty = gibbens and proctor Assuming responsibility/ carer = stone + dobinson Official position= dytham

Answer 9

F: D was 8 years older than her sister (17). D her mother and V all had a history of a heroin addict. D bought some heroin and gave it to V, V self injected the heroin and then developed symptoms which D recognised as being consistent with an overdose. D and her mother didn’t seem medical assistance for fear of getting into trouble- V died H: D’s duty of care arose not out of her familial relationship but from her supplying heroin. She had created a dangerous situation And failed to take action to reduce the risk by summoning medical assistance which would have saved her

Answer 10

Wacker was a Dutch lorry driver his vehicle was intercepted by customs and excise officers at Dover. The officers opened the vehicles container and discovered the dead bodies of 58 illegal immigrants if Chinese origin and two other such immigrants who were still alive. The immigrants hid behind a partition. The container was then filled with a consignment of tomatoes in o conceal the fact that there were illegal immigrants on board. Because the container was designed as a refrigerated compartments thee was insufficient ventilation. The immigrants died due to the lack of air in the container.

Answer 11

He tried to raise the civil defence of ex turpi causa - if D and V are engaging in a criminal enterprise V can’t sue D if someone goes wrong The defence failed because although Duty of care can be established even if D was carrying out a criminal activity. The sentence of ex turpi causa can’t be used to escape liability in criminal law

Answer 12

Breach = D’s act or omission fails below standard expected if the reasonable person doing that activity + d must foresee a risk of death

Answer 13

F: v had an operation in his knee. The two D’s were senior doctors who were responsible for the post op care of V. They failed to identify and treat an infection V died. The D’s were convicted and appealed on the basis that the elements of GN manslaughter were uncertain and so breached Act 7 of the ECHR H: the breach of duty must create a risk of death. Risk of bodily injury or injury to health is NOT enough

Answer 14

``` Factual test - but for (white) Legal test- operating and substantial cause Novus actus interveniens = Act of 3 rd party (pagett) Act of victim (Roberts) Medical intervention (chesire) Exception : thin skull rule (blaue) ```

Answer 15

Bateman 1925

Answer 16

“Having regard time the risk of death involved was the conduct of D so bad as to amount to a criminal act or omission

Answer 17

“ in order to establish criminal liability the facts must be such that in the opinion of the jury the negligence if the accused went beyond a mere matter of compensation between subjects and showed such disregard for the life and safety of others as to amount to a crime against the state and conduct deserving punishment” Simplified: there are no fixed limits on what GN could mean. The only limiting factor is the jury’s common sense

Answer 18

F: D a ships captain followed an unsafe course and relied too heavily on his engines even through he knew the fuel was contaminated. The ship founded off the Cornish coast and 3 crew members were drowned. H: it is up to the jury to decide whether or not negligence is gross negligence even though negligently endangering a ship is a statutory offence. The question for the jury is whether it amounts to the crime of manslaughter

Criminal Law- Involunary Manslaughter (Unlawful and Dangerous act M/S & Gross Negligence M/S) Flashcards

(47 cards)