Fatal offences against the person (3.2CRIMINALLAW(FATALOFFENCESAGAINSTTHEPERSON))
Summary
Summary of Gross Negligence Manslaughter - AQA A-Level Law - A3 revision summary of Gross Negligence Manslaughter
105 views 0 purchase
Course
Fatal offences against the person (3.2CRIMINALLAW(FATALOFFENCESAGAINSTTHEPERSON))
Institution
AQA
Gross Negligence Manslaughter, voluntary Manslaughter.
A3 revision summary for AQA A-level law. Used to plan/prepare for exam responses, A* grade revision summaries. Clearly defining step by step the law of GNM, Including all relevant cases.
Content is accurate as of 23/04/2021.
Made dur...
Fatal offences against the person (3.2CRIMINALLAW(FATALOFFENCESAGAINSTTHEPERSON))
All documents for this subject (4)
Seller
Follow
jakesaville
Content preview
[GNM] ❶ A duty of care) The defendant [GNM] ❷ A breach of duty) The [GNM] ❸ Causation) The death [GNM] ❹ “Gross” Negligence)
must take reasonable care to avoid acts or defendant must have fallen below must be caused by the defendants Where the defendants conduct
omissions, that d can reasonably foresee the standard of care expected of a breach of duty- both factual and departs from proper standers of
would be likely to injury his neighbour. reasonable person in the same or legal causation must be care, involving a risk of death, such
(Donahue V Stevenson), for neighbour test, similar circumstances. (Adomako) established. that it should be judged criminal.
from taut law: (Wacker). • (Factual causation) But for the (Adomako)
i. The damage is reasonable foreseeable • If the defendant is involved in a defendants breach of duty, the
ii. D closely and directly affected D RTC and is a learner driver, this victim would not have died
iii. It is fair, just and reasonable to impose is not taken into account (White) Thus, the jury must the establish:
a duty on the defendant (Nettleship v Weston). • (Legal causation) The Having regard to the risk of death
i. (Caparo v Dickman) • If in doubt, its all about what a defendants breach of duty was involved, was D’s conduct so bad in
• D does not owe a duty of care just reasonable person would do in the more than minimal cause of all the circumstances as to amount
because D is in a position to help. that situation (Hillsburgh death (South London Coroner) to a criminal act or omission?
• A duty taken voluntarily (Stone and disaster) • A very high degree of
Dobinson) negligence. (Andrews)
• Such disregard for the life and
safety of others as to amount to
a crime against the state,
[GNM] ① A duty of care- Involuntary Manslaughter deserving of a punishment.
Omissions) D can assume duty of (Bateman)
care. Where the defendant has a
duty to act but fails in their duty, Gross Negligence Manslaughter
causing death, it could be GNM:
(SEE ACTUS REUS) [GNM] Definition) Gross negligence manslaughter is when a civil [GNM] ❺ Risk of death) There
• A contractual duty (Pittwood) concept of murder becomes so serious it equates to a criminal must be a risk of death to an
• A duty taken voluntarily (Stone wrong. induvial, who is owed a duty of care
and Dobinson) by the defendant. (Misra and
• Starting a chain of events and [GNM] The concepts of GNM) There must be: Srivistava)
creating a dangerous situation ① Adomako) Ds actions 1. ❶ The defendant must owe a duty of
(Miller) are gross when the breach care to the victim
• An duty because of an official of duty of care is so bad in 2. ❷ The defendant must have breached
position (Dythan) all the circumstances as to that duty
amount to a criminal [GNM] Sentencing) The
• Duty because of relationship 3. ❸ The breach of duty must cause the sentence is discretionary life
(Gibbins and Proctor) offence as it has gone victims death
beyond a matter of sentence. It is also circular
4. ❹ The negligence must gross because Juries can convict D of a
compensation. (Adomako) (Adomako) crime, if they think D’s conduct is
5. ❺ It must have a risk of death criminal- Leaving a question of
law to the jury.
① R v Wacker) A duty of care can be owed when GNM can be committed by both an
the defendant is committing a crime (this is not act or an omission
the case in civil law). This is the case if both D and
V are committing a crime too. (Wacker)
Jake Saville (LVTc2-12/13) 30
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller jakesaville. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $3.87. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
