Unlawful Act Manslaughter

Question 1

Which case provides the definition for unlawful act manslaughter?

Answer 1

R v Bristow [2013]

Question 2

What is the definition for unlawful act manslaughter? (3 parts)

Answer 2

(a) An unlawful act intentionally performed
(b) in circumstances rendering it dangerous
(c) causing death

Question 3

What type of crime is UAM?

Answer 3

A constructive crime

Question 4

Do academics approve of this doctrine?

Answer 4

No - it is highly criticised

Question 5

What does a constructive crime mean?

Answer 5

A crime where D is held liable for a more serious offence than that which he intended to do

Question 6

What must the unlawful act be more than?

cases (3)

Answer 6

• more than a civil wrong or mere negligence
• R v Franklin [1883]
• R v Andrews [1937]
• R v Meeking [2012]

Question 7

What must the unlawful act have?
- what is this known as?

cases (2)

Answer 7

• an AR & MR -> must be a full crime
• known as the base offence
• R v Lamb [1967]
• R v Kennedy [2007]

Question 8

What type of act does the unlawful act have to be?

case (1)

Answer 8

• a positive act rather than an omission
• R v Lowe [1973]

Question 9

Does it have to be directed towards V?

cases (3)

Answer 9

• No
• R v Mitchell [1983]
• AG’s Ref (No 3 of 1994) [1997]
• R v Dhaliwal [2006]

Question 10

What does the Prosecution have?

case (1)

Answer 10

• the burden of disproving any defences
• R v Lipman [1970]

Question 11

How many sub-conditions are there for part (a) of UAM?

Answer 11

1. cannot be just a civil wrong or mere negligence
2. the act must be a full crime
3. it needs to be a positive act
4. it doesn’t have to be directed towards V
5. Prosecution have burden of disproving defences

Question 12

What is the test to establish whether an act is done in circumstances rendering it dangerous?
- from which case is this test?

Answer 12

• “the unlawful act must be such as all sober and reasonable people would inevitably recognise must subject the other person to, at least, the risk of some harm resulting therefrom, albeit not serious harm”
• R v Church 1966

Question 13

• What kind of test is it?
  
  • which case tells us this?

Answer 13

• objective test
• DPP v Newbury & Jones [1977]

Question 14

• What risk must be present?
  
  • which 7 cases discuss this?

Answer 14

• a risk of some harm
  1. R v Dawson [1985]
  2. R v Watson [1989]
  3. R v Ball [1989]
  4. R v Carey [2006]
  5. R v JM and SM [2012]
  6. R v Bristow, Dunn and Daley [2013]
  7. R v Long (Henry) [2020]

Question 15

How do you check for part (c) of UAM?

Answer 15

• apply the normal rules of causation
• for causing death