Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Law-Exchange.co.uk Shared Resource

1,979 views

Published on

  • Be the first to comment

Law-Exchange.co.uk Shared Resource

  1. 1. OMISSIONS
  2. 2. ELEMENTS OF LIABILITYPHYSICAL ELEMENTMENTAL ELEMENT
  3. 3. ACTUS REUS GENERAL PRINCIPLE – AR MUST BE A POSITIVE ACT, NOT A FAILURE TO ACT (OMISSION) “A sees B drowning and is able to save him by holding out his hand. A abstains from doing so in order that B may be drowned, and B is drowned. A has committed no offence” Stephen, 1887
  4. 4. HOWEVER……THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS!!!1.STATUTORY 4.AVERT A DANGERDUTY OF YOUR OWN MAKING2.CONTRACTUALDUTY 5.PUBLIC DUTY3.VOLUNTARYASSUMPTION OF 6.SPECIALRESPONSIBILTY RELATIONSHIP
  5. 5. STATUTORY DUTY IMPOSED BY AN ACT OF PARLIAMENT s6 ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 1988 – FAILING TO PROVIDE A SPECIMEN OF BREATH/ URINE s170 ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 1988 – FAILING TO STOP AT/REPORT AN ACCIDENT s1 CHILDREN AND YOUNG PERSONS ACT 1933 – WILFUL NEGLECT OF A CHILD
  6. 6. CONTRACTUAL DUTYR v. PITTWOOD (1902)CONVICTED OF MANSLAUGHTER
  7. 7. PUBLIC DUTY (OFFICIAL POSITION)R v. DYTHAM (1979)CONVICTED OF MISCONDUCT IN APUBLIC OFFICE
  8. 8. AVERT A DANGER OF YOUR OWN MAKING (CONTINUING ACT)R v. MILLER (1983)CONVICTED OF CRIMINALDAMAGE
  9. 9. AVERT A DANGER OF YOUR OWN MAKING (CONTINUING ACT) DPP v. SANTANA-BERMUDEZ (2003) ORIGINALLY THOUGHT THAT AN OMISSION COULD NOT AMOUNT TO ASSAULT OR BATTERY ON PROSECUTOR’S APPEAL, HELD THAT AN OMISSION CAN CONSTITUTE AN ASSAULT OR BATTERY
  10. 10. VOLUNTARY ASSUMPTION OF RESPONSIBILITYR v. STONE AND DOBINSON (1977)CONVICTED OF MANSLAUGHTER
  11. 11. SPECIAL RELATIONSHIPR v. GIBBINS AND PROCTOR(1918)CONVICTED OF MURDER
  12. 12. POSSIBLE CONFUSIONS? CONTRACTUAL v. PUBLIC DUTY VOLUNTARY ASSUMPTION v. SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP R v. SMITH (1979) – DUTY OF CARE BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFE GIBBINS AND PROCTOR – DUTY TO CHILD BY ITS PARENTS IS “SELF EVIDENT” R v. SHEPHERD (1862) – NO DUTY OWED BY MOTHER TO 18 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER R v. CHATTAWAY (1922) – DUTY OWED BY PARENTS TO 25 YEAR OLD DAUGHTER WHO WAS COMPLETELY HELPLESS
  13. 13. MEDICAL ISSUES AIREDALE NHS TRUST v. BLAND (1993) NOT PROVIDING TREATMENT v. POSITIVELY KILLING – PATIENT’S BEST INTERESTS

×