GNM Flashcards
(20 cards)
test
DOC
D neg breached duty
RF breach gave risk to obvious and serious risk of death
caused death of V
Breach di bad amount to GN and criminal sanction needed
DOC cases
R v Winter and Winter
R v Wacker
R v Gemma Evan’s
R v Winter and Winter
Take R care if likely to injury neighbour
neighbour is person so closely and directly affected by act ought to be R be in contemplation
R v Wacker
owed DOC to illegal migrants in back of truck
R v Gemma Evan’s
D contributed or creates state of affairs know or ought R to know life threatening duty to take R steps to save will normally arise
BOD
through act or omission
RF obvious and serious risk cases
R v Singh
R v Gemma Evan’s
R v Rudling
R v rose
R v Kuddus
R v gemma evan’s
life threatening not just injury or serious injury
R v Rudling
need clear unambiguous risk
R v Rose
assessed against knowledge at time of breach
possibility of test revealing risk of serious injury difference tkt clear and obvious risk of death
R v Kuddus
need to look at R person in Ds position
Laird on rose
creates perverse incentive - do as little as possible to discharge duty and get let off
caused death case
R v Sellu - if doc took actions needed V not dead
circumstances GN and criminal sanction cases
R v Bateman
R v Adomako
AG réf no2 99
R v Misra
R v Sellu
R v Bateman
such disregard for life and safety it amounts to a crime
R v adomako
so bad amount to criminal act or culpable omission
AG réf no2 99
do not need to prove any state of mind
R v Misra
argued here it was circular but is behaviour GN and conséquences criminal
R v Sellu
so bad and such a departure from standard of R competent person that it amounted to be criminal
stark
rose shifts focus onto Ds belief - wrongdoing not omission of duty
