In general, the criminal law prohibits the doing of harm, but it does not impose a liability for failure to do good. Assess the truth of statement by reference to the situations persons may incur.

In general, the criminal law prohibits the doing of harm, but it does not impose a liability for failure to do good. Assess the truth of statement by reference to the situations persons may incur. For a person to commit a crime, he must have committed some kind of act. There are three ways in which a person can be tested on whether he has committed the crime. The first is that there must be a crime in the first place i.e. murder. The second is that he must have meant to cause it e.g. the result would not have happened if he had not caused it. The third is that he must have a duty of care. In English criminal law, a person is prohibited from causing any kind of harm to another individual. The criminal system does not impose any liability for not doing anything i.e. if a person is drowning in a pool you are not ordered by law to save that person. The only reason you would have to do this is if u were contracted to have that duty. Although in some statues like the Road traffic act (1988) make it an offence to fail to do something. Contractual duty, in R v Pitwood (1902), a signalman was convicted of manslaughter. He was employed by the railway company to look after a level crossing and to make sure that the gate was securely shut when there was a train due. He had left his post and this resulted in a person wondering onto the lines and being killed by an oncoming train. A

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 728
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Rules of Causation Case. Jess throws paint in Sams eyes. Sam had to go to hospital to have paint removed from his eyes. On the way home, just before his sight was fully recovered, he tripped on the kerb and fractured his skull.

Jess throws paint in Sam's eyes. Sam had to go to hospital to have paint removed from his eyes. On the way home, just before his sight was fully recovered, he tripped on the kerb and fractured his skull. - Outline the rules of causation and briefly discuss whether Jess caused Sam's fractured skull (7 marks) Once it has been established that the defendant performed the act, the prosecution must prove that it was the defendant's conduct which caused those consequences to occur. The prosecution has to show that the defendant's conduct was the factual cause of that consequence, the defendant's conduct was in law the cause of that consequence and there was no intervening act which broke the chain of causation. There are two types of causation, factual causation, the defendant can only be guilty if the consequences would not have happened but for this act. An example of this is, R v Pagett, the defendant used his girlfriend as a human shield against police fire. He shot at the police, they fired back, killing his girlfriend. But for his actions she wouldn't have died. This relates to the scenario because but for Jess throwing paint in Sam's eyes, he would not have been partly sighted and tripped on the kerb resulting in a fractured skull. Causation in law, the defendant's actions must be the operating and substantial cause. An example of this is, R v Smith, two soldiers were

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 664
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Should Barristers and Solicitors Fusion or remain as two separate professions? The professions of barrister and solicitor are separate and the work is different

. . .L a w. . . The Fusion Debate HITIKSHA PATEL Should Barristers and Solicitors Fusion or remain as two separate professions? The professions of barrister and solicitor are separate and the work is different. It is wrong to think of solicitors as some sort of junior barrister, or barristers as trainee solicitors. It is not possible to belong to both branches of the legal profession, but it is possible for a barrister to retrain and become a solicitor, and many often do; similarly solicitors can move in the opposite direction. Today, there are still several differences between the roles, training and regulation between solicitors and barristers. Barristers can advocate in court, research cases and legal developments, meet certain professional clients as a result of the 1990 and 1999 act which bought some similarities between the roles of solicitors and barristers. And as a result of the act, solicitors have become more like barristers-it allows them to advocate but they still have to do most of the paper work and barristers can do some paper work. On the other hand, solicitors can give legal advice to the public- so people can directly contact them, still do paper work ( such as prepare cases, appeals, write letters, contracts and wills) and meet all clients even in prison, interview and phone witnesses and clients. There are still many differences, such as the

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 1039
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Murder - Notes and Evaluation.

Murder Murder is a common law offence; it has been defined by the decisions of judges in cases and the accepted definition is based on one given by Lord Coke. This is that murder is 'the unlawful killing of a human being under the Queen's peace with malice aforethought, express or implied'. In order for the actus reus to be fulfilled, the following principles must be satisfied : 1.) The defendant must do an act 2.) Which is unlawful 3.) which substantially causes the death of the victim 4.) who was a human being. There used to be a further requirement - that the victim had to die within a year and a day of his last injury by the defendant. This was abolished in 1996. .) The defendant must do an act To be guilty of murder the Defendant must have been proven to have done a voluntary act, although manslaughter can also consist of an omission. This can arise when the Defendant is under a legal duty to act but fails to do so, as in the following situations - Special legal relationship, e.g. Gibbons & Proctor (loco parentis), Statutory Duty, e.g. Road Traffic Act 1972, Voluntary undertaking, Employment duties and Accidental act which creates a dangerious situation. It is very unusual for a charge of murder to be based upon an ommission. 2.) Which is unlawful The act or omission that causes the victims death must be unlawful. It is not unlawful if what is done is in

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 1392
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

judges avoid following precedent

Outline how judges can avoid following precedent and discuss the advantages of their doing so. Judges can avoid following precedent is a number of ways. Distinguishing is one way, where the material facts of the case are different from a previous one and then the judge does not have to follow the earlier one. This is seen in Balfour v Balfour (1919), where the husband made a verbal agreement of giving his wife £30 a month, while he was away in Ceylon. However he stopped the payments and Mrs Balfour started legal action. It reached the Court of Appeal and they held that there was no enforceable agreement, as there was no evidence for a legally binding promise. So when the case of Merritt and Merritt (1970) came along, where Mr Merritt and Mrs Merritt signed an agreement that he would pay her a monthly sum. When the mortgage of the house was paid, Mr Merritt refused to hand over the house. The court accepted the case, as it was more than a domestic agreement as the agreement was signed after they had separated. This decision is from Balfour v Balfour (1919) as there was a signed contract with terms and conditions which both parties had signed. Therefore the judge was allowed to distinguish the case as the facts were different. Judges can also distinguish on a point of law and this is seen in the case R v Holley (2006), which overruled R v Smith (2000). In R v Smith

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 890
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

AS LAW -JUDICIAL PRECEDENT

What is meant by judicial precedents and that judges "are not in liberty to reject them"? (a)Precedent is a law which has been created and is used to make decisions on cases. There are four types of precedent; judicial precedent is when past decisions made by judges are used to create law for future judges to follow. This part of the law is called case law and is used today. If a precedent is bound or binding then this means that a judge must use a previous case and are tied into it and cannot ignore the precedent. If a precedent is persuasive this means that a judge can ignore a past case but can choose to use the decision if they are persuaded that the principles are correct. Finally if you choose to follow a precedent then this is the process of using a past precedent in a future similar case. The Doctrine of Stare Decesis is when cases are treated alike. In order to achieve cases being treated alike, the system was in need of rules. These laws created the source of law known as precedent. In order to create a precedent a judge must make a judgement recorded for future judges. The judgement can be divided into two areas; Ratio Decidendi which is the reason behind the decision. This is part of the judgement that sets out the core of the decision and the reason behind it. It is part of a decision which a future case must be decided by. Secondly a case can be decided on by

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 2295
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Homicide Act 1957

Q- Using Cases to illustrate your points critically, decribe the Homocide Act 1957 and include the subsequent judicial interpretations of it. The law surrounding homicide carries a wide scope of controversial issues; this can include the topics of Murder, Manslaughter, Infanticide and Vehicular homicide The definition of murder is derived from the writing of the jurist Sir Edward Coke: "Murder is where a person of sound memory and of the age of discretion unlawfully killeth...any reasonable creature in rerum natura under the king's peace, with malice aforethought, either expressed by party or implied by law, so as the party wounded or hurt etc., die of the wound or hurt etc." For any crime the basic requirements for an offence to be successful are an 'Actus Reus', 'Mens Rea' and an absence of a valid defence. The actus reus of murder is the unlawful killing of another person in the Queen's peace. The definition still stands today and until recently the definition included the "year and a day" rule but this has now been abolished. It is up to the prosecution to prove the defendant (D) caused the V's death, that there was a causal link starting from the D's act leading to the V's harm. In cases where a V is stabbed or shot and dies immediately from the wound it is obvious that D caused V's death. it must be proved in each case that the defendant's actions were the cause of

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 1974
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

Critical evaluation of murder for A2 law unit 4

Murder answer plan At the beginning of its report on the Partial Defences to Murder (Law Com 290, 2004), the Law Commission says expressly that it "has long considered that the law of murder is in need of review". This shows that it has been brought to the attention of parliament by their advisors that the law on murder is in an great need of being changed, however as parliament doesn't have to follow all that the law commission suggests to them - all the law commission is designed to do is to suggest to parliament things they think need to be changed, not things parliament will in fact change. This shows that there are indeed some points of the law on murder which need to be addressed, but that parliament isnt responding to that need as they don't feel they have the time to carry out the drafting of a statue to change it. So it shows a lack of commitment to addressing the law on behalf of parliament, whose job it is really to make the country a safer place to live in for the citizens of the UK, but it is debatable as to how safe our country really is when parliament don't commit the time to changing important statutes on murder as murder is a serious issue as to the life and wellbeings of british citizens - many people want justice to be served by those who are a danger to society. The law on murder is considered to be quite old, as the definition used for it was by Lord

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 2528
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

In this Assignment I am going to describe the requirements of a valid contract and also describe how statutes affect contractual terms.

BTEC National Diploma in Business Aspect of Contract and Business Law Introduction: In this Assignment I am going to describe the requirements of a valid contract and also describe how statutes affect contractual terms. Task 1.1 (p1) In this first task I will be explaining the requirements to create a valid contract and I will also point out the differences between an offer and an invitation to treat. A contract is an oral or written agreement between people. A contract is made in order to know your rights so that you cannot breach it, which means a contract binds the parties together so that no one can breach the agreement in future. A contract is an agreement between two or more parties who intend to be bounded by law. A valid contract has to consist the following: * A valid offer * A valid Acceptance * A valid Consideration * Intention * Capacity * Legality Offer This is the first stage of a contract, this is when the offeror the person who makes the offer, states an interest to enter an agreement, if the offer that the offeror sets is accepted by the other party (the offeree). An offer is a proposal, promise or other manifestation of willingness to make and fulfil a contract. However and offer from the offeror could also be terminated if the offeree does not accept the terms of the agreement. There are certain rules relating to what a valid offer is one of

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 1997
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay

How effective was the defence of intoxication?

How effective was the defence of intoxication? Intoxication is the excessive drinking and various forms of drug taking which can be voluntary or involuntary. Intoxication can be a defence depending on whether or not D has the required mens rea. If in an intoxicated state without the required mens rea D may not be guilty. This depends on whether the intoxication was voluntary or involuntary and whether the offence charged was one of specific or basic intent. The absence of mens rea is required otherwise intoxication cannot be a defence as shown in Kingston (1994) 'a drugged intent is still intent'. Even if D lacks the mens rea D can still be found liable which is an exception to the rule that both mens rea and actus reus are required. Voluntary intoxication can negate the mens rea for a specific intent offence. If D is so intoxicated he cannot form the mens rea, he may be able to put forward the defence, but normally he will not avoid liability completely, if it is possible to convict him a lesser basic intent offence. If D is so intoxicated that he has not formed the mens rea for the offence he is not guilty. This rule comes from the case DPP v Beard. D had been charge with murder and pleaded intoxication to deny malice aforethought. From this case it is now accepted that D need not be incapable of forming intent; it is sufficient if they do not in fact do so. However, D

  • Ranking:
  • Word count: 1624
  • Level: AS and A Level
  • Subject: Law
Access this essay