Non-fatal offences
Context
Topics discussed:
Criminal liability
Assault
Battery
Actual Bodily Harm
Grevious Bodily Harm (s20 and s18)
Information
Work through each topic step by step - each topic has been structured cronilogically to provide guidance on how to
answer a question and the elements to discuss, in the best order
Use cases (written in red) to support the law e.g. the case of R v White illustrates the ‘but for test’, by which the
defendant can only be guilty if the consequence would not have happened but for his act.
, Criminal Liability
Actus Reus + Mens Rea = Offence - Defence = Criminal Liability
Requirements for criminal liability:
Actus Reus
Causation
Mens rea
Actus Reus
Physical element - guilty act of the defendant
Must be a voluntary act Hill v Baxter
May be caused due to: Failure to act
Contract requires them to act R v Pitwood
Public position requires to act R v Dytham
Fails to minimise harmful consequences of act R v Miller
Assumes a duty and accepts responsibility R v Stone & Dobinson
Duty due to a relationship R v Gibbins & Proctor
Causation
Both must be proven:
Factual causation - Defendant can only be guilty if the consequences would not have happened ‘but for’ his act R v White
Legal causation - Defendant’s actions must be a ‘more than slight or trifling link’ R v Kimsey
Additional considerations:
Novus Actus Interveniens (intervening act) - this can break the chain of causation = no causation
Act of a third party R v Jordan (medical treatment ‘so palpably wrong’)
Victims own acts R v Williams
Natural but unpredictable event
Mens Rea
Guilty mind element - Defendant is guilty if he intends to perform a criminal act
Direct intent - Defendant had the ‘aim desire and purpose’ R v Mohan
Oblique/indirect intent - Virtually certain consequence of defendants act, he is aware of this consequence R v Woolin
Context
Topics discussed:
Criminal liability
Assault
Battery
Actual Bodily Harm
Grevious Bodily Harm (s20 and s18)
Information
Work through each topic step by step - each topic has been structured cronilogically to provide guidance on how to
answer a question and the elements to discuss, in the best order
Use cases (written in red) to support the law e.g. the case of R v White illustrates the ‘but for test’, by which the
defendant can only be guilty if the consequence would not have happened but for his act.
, Criminal Liability
Actus Reus + Mens Rea = Offence - Defence = Criminal Liability
Requirements for criminal liability:
Actus Reus
Causation
Mens rea
Actus Reus
Physical element - guilty act of the defendant
Must be a voluntary act Hill v Baxter
May be caused due to: Failure to act
Contract requires them to act R v Pitwood
Public position requires to act R v Dytham
Fails to minimise harmful consequences of act R v Miller
Assumes a duty and accepts responsibility R v Stone & Dobinson
Duty due to a relationship R v Gibbins & Proctor
Causation
Both must be proven:
Factual causation - Defendant can only be guilty if the consequences would not have happened ‘but for’ his act R v White
Legal causation - Defendant’s actions must be a ‘more than slight or trifling link’ R v Kimsey
Additional considerations:
Novus Actus Interveniens (intervening act) - this can break the chain of causation = no causation
Act of a third party R v Jordan (medical treatment ‘so palpably wrong’)
Victims own acts R v Williams
Natural but unpredictable event
Mens Rea
Guilty mind element - Defendant is guilty if he intends to perform a criminal act
Direct intent - Defendant had the ‘aim desire and purpose’ R v Mohan
Oblique/indirect intent - Virtually certain consequence of defendants act, he is aware of this consequence R v Woolin
