Level 2
Level 1


26 words 0 ignored

Ready to learn       Ready to review

Ignore words

Check the boxes below to ignore/unignore words, then click save at the bottom. Ignored words will never appear in any learning session.

All None

Identify and describe the law.
Evaluate and apply the law. Evaluation requires adjectives.
Spelling, punctuation and grammar. However, these marks will be awarded automatically as you acquire marks from AO1 and AO2.
Actus Reus
An act, omission or state of affairs. This must be voluntary with the chain of causation unbroken.
This is where somebody fails to act, yet they have a duty of care which requires them to. In the UK, there is no general duty to act. However, there are 6 exceptions to this rule.
Khan and Khan
Drug dealing brothers supplied heroin to girl who self injected - she collapsed, brothers left. Girl dies. Gross negligence manslaughter convictions quashed by CA as no duty of care in existence.
Contractual duty
Duty instated due to a contract. This situation typically arises through employment.
Failed to drop barriers, leads to death. Convicted of manslaughter - didn't do job contractually obliged to do.
Anesthetist didn't realise oxygen tube had been dislodged. Patient dies, D convicted of manslaughter - failed to meet expectations. Leading case for gross negligence manslaughter.
Public office
If D holds a position in public office, they are expected to act on behalf of the public when necessary. Failure to do so may lead to criminal liability.
On duty police officer witnesses fight, goes off duty. Convicted of misconduct as he could have alerted other officers or intervened.
Special Relationship
Owing a duty of care due to the relation of D to V. For example, a parent has a duty to look after their child.
Gibbins and Proctor
7 year old girl deliberately isolated and starved to death. Defendants convicted of murder because of assumed responsibility / special relationship.
Assumed Responsibility
D 'assumes' the care of V - typically arises when D allows V to move in.
Stone and Dobinson
Sister with eating disorder moves in; tried helping her, but she dies. Convicted of manslaughter (assumed responsibility) by allowing sister to move in.
D moves in with elderly aunt to care for her. When aunt becomes ill, D fails to act and she dies. Convicted of manslaughter as voluntarily moved in to care for aunt.
Dangerous situation
Duty owed through creation of dangerous circumstances - e.g. starting a fire and then leaving.
Squatter smoking cigarette in bed sets mattress alight, then leaves the room. Later, building is on fire and leaves. Convicted of arson as could have done something after starting fire.
Policewoman asks if there is anything sharp in D's pocket. D says no, then smirks as she scratches her hand on a needle in his pocket. Convicted of ABH as could have told the truth. An example of ABH by omission due to the duty of care created by the creation of a dangerous situation.
D bought/gave heroin to half sister. She self-injected, collapsed and was put to bed by D and mother, hoping she'd recover (she died). D and mother convicted of manslaughter for creating dangerous situation.
Statutory duty
Acts of Parliaments may impose a duty of care which creates liability for those who fail to follow certain procedures.
s6 Road Traffic Act
This is an example of a statutory duty which requires drivers to be breathalyzed on request.
Wife was too scared of doctors to allow D to get one when she had a stillborn baby. Eventually got doctor, but wife was so ill that she died. Release from duty - charged, but not convicted of manslaughter.
Victim in PVS. After 3 years, it became clear there's no chance of recovery (turned off life support). Duty of care replaced by duty to act in patient's best interests.
Good Samaritan Law
Used by countries such as France and Holland, this states that everyone owes a duty towards everyone else. Mention this on an essay for AO2 marks - law becomes fair, just, moral, etc. Remember to expand your points.
Issues with the Good Samaritan Law
Becomes ridiculous if potentially hundreds of people are made liable for failing to rescue someone in danger. Becomes hypocritical, as on one hand it expects people to owe a duty towards each other, but on the other hand expects taxpayers to contribute towards the emergency services (who are trained to rescue people). Harsh as how will disabled people be able to attempt a rescue - how disabled does one have to be before being unable to complete the rescue? Objective definition of how dangerous a situation has to be before people are exempted from liability is absurd as everyone will have different capabilities.