PAPER 1 LAW REVISION SUMMARY
Assault - s39 Criminal Justice Act 1988
AR: defendants act and words causes the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful force
Words - R v Constanza
Silent telephone calls - R v Ireland
Acts/gesture - Logdon v DPP
Words may negate an assault - Tuberville v Savage
MR: intention or recklessness to cause the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful force
Battery
AR: defendant applies unlawful force on the victim
Slightest touch - R v Thomas
Lack of consent- Collins v Wilcock
Direct/indirect application of force- DPP v K
MR: defendant has intention or recklessness as to applying unlawful force
Section 47 OAPA 1861
AR: assault occasioning actual bodily harm
Assault - means assault or battery
Occasioning means causing
ABH :
- ‘any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health and comfort of the victim’
(Miller)
- Injury cannot be trivial or insignificant ( R v Chan Fook)
- ABH includes temporary loss of consciousness ( T v DPP)
- ABH includes damage to persons hair ( DPP v Smith)
- Psychiatric harm is ABH ( Chan Fook)
MR: intention or recklessness as to the initial assault or battery
S.20 OAPA 1861
AR: Unlawful and malicious wounding or inflicting GBH
Wounding requires both layer of the skin to have been broken - JJC v Eisenhower
GBH means really serious harm - DPP v Smith
Age and Health of victim are relevant - R v Bollom
MR: intention or recklessness to inflict some harm
S.18 OAPA 1861
AR: unlawful and malicious wounding or causing GBH
MR: intention to cause GBH or intention to resist/ prevent arrest ( Morrison)
Unlawful act manslaughter - 4 elements
1. There must be an unlawful criminal act (Lamb) cause by an act not an omission
(Lowe)
2. The unlawful act must be dangerous - ‘all sober and reasonable people would
recognise must subject the other person to the risk of some harm, albeit not serious
harm’ (Church)
, 3. The unlawful act must have caused the victims death - factual and legal causation
(Pagett/White)
4. The defendant needs the mens rea of the original unlawful act
Gross negligence manslaughter - 5 elements
1. Defendant must owe a duty of care
- Contractual duty - Pitwood
- Special relationship - Gibbins & Proctor
- Voluntary care - Stone & Dobinson
- Dangerous situation - Miller/ Evans
- Defendant and Victim are involved in criminal activity - Wacker
2. Defendant must have breached the duty by an act not an omission
- Defendant must have fallen below the standard of are expected of a
reasonable man (Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks/ Adomako)
3. The breach must have cause death - factual/legal causation
4. Breach must create an objective risk of death not just harm (Misra)
5. Negligence is gross (Bateman confirmed in Adomako)
- Goes beyond standard of reasonable man that it should amount to a crime
- Defendant showed such disregard for the life and safety of the victim that it
should be a crime.
Murder
Lord Coke definition of murder is ‘ the unlawful killing of a human being under the king's
peace’
AR: the unlawful killing of a human being
Unlawful killing - through an act or an omission
Human being - after you take your first breath
Kings peace - enemy during wartime
MR: malice aforethought express (intention to kill) or implied (intention to cause GBH)
(Moloney)
Partial defence to Murder - Loss of control
s .54 Coroners and Justice Act 2009
S.54 (1) where a person kills, Defendant is not to be convicted of murder if:
- Defendant lost control s54 (1)(a) Loc does not have to be sudden (Dawes)
- LOC had a qualifying trigger s54 (1)(b)
- ‘A person of Defendants sex and age with a normal degree of tolerance and self
restrain and in the same circumstances , might have reacted in the same or similar
way as the D.’ ( short temper must be ignored) s54 (1)(c) (Clinton)
Revenge attack = not loss of control s54 (4)
s55 : meaning of qualifying trigger
LOC has a qualifying trigger if subsections 3,4 or 5 apply.
S55 (3) If Ds loss of control was due to fear of serious violence from V (FEAR TRIGGER)
(Ward)
S55 (4) If Ds loss of control was due to something said or done or both which: (ANGER
TRIGGER)
- S55 (4)(a) things said or done constituted of an extremely grave character
- S55 (4)(b) caused D to have a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged ( Sands)
Assault - s39 Criminal Justice Act 1988
AR: defendants act and words causes the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful force
Words - R v Constanza
Silent telephone calls - R v Ireland
Acts/gesture - Logdon v DPP
Words may negate an assault - Tuberville v Savage
MR: intention or recklessness to cause the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful force
Battery
AR: defendant applies unlawful force on the victim
Slightest touch - R v Thomas
Lack of consent- Collins v Wilcock
Direct/indirect application of force- DPP v K
MR: defendant has intention or recklessness as to applying unlawful force
Section 47 OAPA 1861
AR: assault occasioning actual bodily harm
Assault - means assault or battery
Occasioning means causing
ABH :
- ‘any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health and comfort of the victim’
(Miller)
- Injury cannot be trivial or insignificant ( R v Chan Fook)
- ABH includes temporary loss of consciousness ( T v DPP)
- ABH includes damage to persons hair ( DPP v Smith)
- Psychiatric harm is ABH ( Chan Fook)
MR: intention or recklessness as to the initial assault or battery
S.20 OAPA 1861
AR: Unlawful and malicious wounding or inflicting GBH
Wounding requires both layer of the skin to have been broken - JJC v Eisenhower
GBH means really serious harm - DPP v Smith
Age and Health of victim are relevant - R v Bollom
MR: intention or recklessness to inflict some harm
S.18 OAPA 1861
AR: unlawful and malicious wounding or causing GBH
MR: intention to cause GBH or intention to resist/ prevent arrest ( Morrison)
Unlawful act manslaughter - 4 elements
1. There must be an unlawful criminal act (Lamb) cause by an act not an omission
(Lowe)
2. The unlawful act must be dangerous - ‘all sober and reasonable people would
recognise must subject the other person to the risk of some harm, albeit not serious
harm’ (Church)
, 3. The unlawful act must have caused the victims death - factual and legal causation
(Pagett/White)
4. The defendant needs the mens rea of the original unlawful act
Gross negligence manslaughter - 5 elements
1. Defendant must owe a duty of care
- Contractual duty - Pitwood
- Special relationship - Gibbins & Proctor
- Voluntary care - Stone & Dobinson
- Dangerous situation - Miller/ Evans
- Defendant and Victim are involved in criminal activity - Wacker
2. Defendant must have breached the duty by an act not an omission
- Defendant must have fallen below the standard of are expected of a
reasonable man (Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks/ Adomako)
3. The breach must have cause death - factual/legal causation
4. Breach must create an objective risk of death not just harm (Misra)
5. Negligence is gross (Bateman confirmed in Adomako)
- Goes beyond standard of reasonable man that it should amount to a crime
- Defendant showed such disregard for the life and safety of the victim that it
should be a crime.
Murder
Lord Coke definition of murder is ‘ the unlawful killing of a human being under the king's
peace’
AR: the unlawful killing of a human being
Unlawful killing - through an act or an omission
Human being - after you take your first breath
Kings peace - enemy during wartime
MR: malice aforethought express (intention to kill) or implied (intention to cause GBH)
(Moloney)
Partial defence to Murder - Loss of control
s .54 Coroners and Justice Act 2009
S.54 (1) where a person kills, Defendant is not to be convicted of murder if:
- Defendant lost control s54 (1)(a) Loc does not have to be sudden (Dawes)
- LOC had a qualifying trigger s54 (1)(b)
- ‘A person of Defendants sex and age with a normal degree of tolerance and self
restrain and in the same circumstances , might have reacted in the same or similar
way as the D.’ ( short temper must be ignored) s54 (1)(c) (Clinton)
Revenge attack = not loss of control s54 (4)
s55 : meaning of qualifying trigger
LOC has a qualifying trigger if subsections 3,4 or 5 apply.
S55 (3) If Ds loss of control was due to fear of serious violence from V (FEAR TRIGGER)
(Ward)
S55 (4) If Ds loss of control was due to something said or done or both which: (ANGER
TRIGGER)
- S55 (4)(a) things said or done constituted of an extremely grave character
- S55 (4)(b) caused D to have a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged ( Sands)
