Involuntary Manslaughter 1B

Question 1

Which case set out the 6 elements for proving Gross Negligence Manslaughter?

Answer 1

R v Broughton

Question 2

What are those 6 elements?

Answer 2

1. D must owe V a duty of care
2. D must breach that duty
3. There must be a serious and obvious risk of death.
4. The risk of death must be reasonably foreseeable.
5. D’s breach must cause v’s death.
6. The breach must be grossly negligent.

Question 3

What is the definition of gross negligence manslaughter?

Answer 3

Unlawful killing without intent to kill or cause GBH.

Question 4

What are the 2 types of involuntary manslaughter?

Answer 4

Unlawful Act Manslaughter
Gross Negligence Manslaughter

Question 5

What are the 5 dutys of care and their cases?

Answer 5

1. Contractual - R v Pittwood
2. Relationship - R v Gibbins & Proctor
3. Voluntarily assuming responsibility- R v Stone & Dobinson
4. Public Office - R v Dytham
5. Creating a dangerous situation - R v Miller.

Question 6

What is the case that defines breach of duty?

Answer 6

Blyth v BWW

Question 7

What is the case that talks about professionals being compared to professionals?

Answer 7

Bolam

Question 8

What is the case that says age lowers the standard of care?

Answer 8

Mullin v Richards

Question 9

What is the case that says inexperience is irrelevant?

Answer 9

Nettleship v Weston

Question 10

What are the 4 risk factors and their cases?

Answer 10

1. Size of risk - Bolton v Stone
2. Practicability of precautions - Latimer v AEC
3. Seriousness of potential harm - Paris v SBC
4. Benefit of potential risk - Watt v HCC

Question 11

Which case says there must be a serious and obvious risk of death?

Answer 11

R v Rose

Question 12

What did R v Rose say about the concept of serious and obvious risk of death?

Answer 12

An obvious risk is a present risk which is clear and unambiguous, not one which might become apparent on further investigation.

Question 13

What was the second thing that R v Rose said?

Answer 13

The serious and obvious risk of death must be reasonably foreseeable.

Question 14

Who has to foresee the serious and obvious risk of death?

Answer 14

A reasonable man.

Question 15

What do we use to find out if D’s breach caused the death of the victim?

Answer 15

Factual and legal causation.

Question 16

How did Broughton say that we can decide if something is grossly negligent?

Answer 16

Ask the jury if the circumstances of the breach were truly exceptionally bad as to require criminal sanction.

Question 17

What is the definition of Unlawful Act Manslaughter?

Answer 17

Dangerous and unlawful act that has caused death.

Question 18

What is the only actus reus needed to prove UAM and what does it need to be?

Answer 18

D must commit an unlawful act and it must cause V’s death and must be dangerous.

Question 19

What is the only mens rea needed to prove UAM?

Answer 19

D must have the MR for the unlawful act ONLY.

Question 20

What can’t the unlawful act be?

Answer 20

An omission.

Question 21

What does R v Stone and Dobinson say about Omissions?

Answer 21

A failure (omission) will be insufficient for an unlawful act manslaughter. There must be an act.

Question 22

What does R v Franklin say the unlawful act must be?

Answer 22

Criminal! A civil wrong is not enough.

Question 23

What does R v Lamb say?

Answer 23

D must have all the elements of the unlawful act - MR and AR.

Question 24

What are the three unlawful acts that should always be used?

Answer 24

Assault, Battery or Criminal Damage.

Question 25

What is the Mens rea of assault?

Answer 25

Direct intention or recklessness as to cause the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful force.

Question 26

What is the mens rea of Battery?

Answer 26

Direct intention or recklessness as to apply unlawful force to another person.

Question 27

What is the mens rea of criminal damage?

Answer 27

Direct intention or recklessness to cause damage to property.

Question 28

What did DPP v Newbury and Jones say?

Answer 28

It is not necessary to prove that D foresaw any harm from his act, only that D has the MR for that unlawful act.

Question 29

What other legal principle was used in Mitchell?

Answer 29

Transfered Malice (R v Latimer)

Question 30

What must the unlawful act cause?

Answer 30

The death. Here we would use causation.

Question 31

What was the legal principle in R v Cato?

Answer 31

The chain of causation is not broken because D administered the drug to V.

Question 32

What was the legal principle in R v Kennedy?

Answer 32

The chain of causation was broken because V administered the drug to themselves.

Question 33

What legal principle came from R v Dear?

Answer 33

Self neglect by V does not break the chain of causation.

Question 34

What does R v Church say?

Answer 34

An act is dangerous if a sober and reasonable person would foresee a risk of physical harm.

Question 35

What does R v Dawson say?

Answer 35

Emotional harm is not enough to prove an act is dangerous.

Question 36

What does R v Watson say?

Answer 36

A reasonable person must realise a risk of harm for the act to be dangerous.

Question 37

What does R v JM and SM say?

Answer 37

No need to foresee the specific harm, only that some harm may be caused.

Question 38

What does R v Goodfellow say?

Answer 38

An unlawful act can be aimed at property as long as a sober and reasonable person could foresee a risk of harm to a person.

Question 39

What does R v Farnon and Ellis say?

Answer 39

Low mental age does not make any difference to liability.