Gross Negligence Manslaughter A01

Question 1

4 part test established in

Answer 1

R v Adamako

Question 2

DUTY OF CARE

Answer 2

Established - Robinsion v CCWYP

Novel - Caparo

Question 3

R v Wacker

Answer 3

DoC still owed to people df is carrying out a criminal act with

Question 4

BREACH OF DUTY

Answer 4

R v Becker → mistake is not always enough for breach

Question 6

RISK OF DEATH

Answer 6

R v Singh → a reasonable person would have foreseen a serious and obvious risk of death
(risk of injury even serious is not enough)

Question 7

R v Broughton

Answer 7

risk must be much more than minimal or remote, ‘obvious’ = apparent, striking, and glaring

Question 8

mens rea

Answer 8

R v Bateman → negligence must have went beyond a mere matter of compensation, must show such a disregard for the life and safety of others

Question 9

physical conduct (case)

Answer 9

AG Reference no.2 1999 → physical conduct may be enough alone to prove GNM without MR

Question 10

Caparo test part 1 (case)

Answer 10

Damage reasonably foreseeable - Maguire v Harland

Question 11

Caparo test part 2 (case)

Answer 11

Sufficient proximity - McLoughin v O’Brien

Question 12

Caparo test part 3 (case)

Answer 12

Fair and just - Griffiths v Lindsay