Non-Fatal Offences
⌚ Modern
R v Bollom
[2003] EWCA Crim 2846 · Court of Appeal
AR
Facts
Bruising to a 17-month-old baby. Question whether collective bruises = GBH.
Held
Severity assessed in light of the victim's characteristics (e.g. age, health).
Ratio
GBH severity assessed relative to the victim's characteristics (age, condition).
🔒
In build
Non-Fatal Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Gross Negligence MS
★ Classic⚖ Leading✓ Free sample
R v Adomako
[1995] 1 AC 171 · House of Lords
Principle
Facts
Anaesthetist failed to notice disconnected endotracheal tube; patient died.
Held
Conviction upheld. Lord Mackay LC set out the four-stage test.
Ratio
Modern test for GNM: (1) duty of care, (2) breach, (3) gross breach (criminal threshold), (4) causation of death.
R v Asmelash
[2013] EWCA Crim 157 · Court of Appeal
Principle
Facts
Drunk the defendant was killed his partner; argued intoxication relevant to normal-person test.
Held
Voluntary intoxication is not relevant to the normal-person test under s.54(1)(c).
Ratio
Normal person under LOC is sober — intoxication ignored for the objective test.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 3 — Loss of Control · £6.99
Buy Topic 3 → £6.99
Attorney General's Reference (No 3 of 1994)
[1998] AC 245 · House of Lords
MR
Facts
The defendant was stabbed pregnant woman; baby born prematurely and died.
Held
Could be UAM but not murder — no transferred malice from mother to foetus to baby.
Ratio
Transferred malice does not stretch to in utero foetus that survives to be born and then dies.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 2 — Murder · £6.99
Buy Topic 2 → £6.99
Attorney General's Reference (No 6 of 1980)
[1981] QB 715 · Court of Appeal
Defence
Facts
Two youths fought to settle dispute, one was injured.
Held
Consent generally no defence to ABH or worse, even between consenting adults.
Ratio
Consent no defence to ABH in private fighting — public policy exceptions exist (sport, surgery).
🔒
In build
Defences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
R v Bailey
[1983] 1 WLR 760 · Court of Appeal
Defence
Facts
Diabetic the defendant failed to eat after insulin; attacked the victim during hypoglycaemia.
Held
Hypoglycaemia can be non-insane automatism if not self-induced through recklessness.
Ratio
Non-insane automatism for self-induced states only if not also reckless.
🔒
In build
Defences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Property Offences
⚖ Leading⌚ Modern
R v Barton & Booth
[2020] EWCA Crim 575 · Court of Appeal
MR
Facts
Care-home owner defrauded elderly residents.
Held
Confirmed Ivey objective test applies in criminal law. Ghosh overruled.
Ratio
Ivey two-stage objective test applies in criminal as well as civil law.
🔒
In build
Property Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Gross Negligence MS
★ Classic⚖ Leading✓ Free sample
R v Bateman
(1925) 19 Cr App R 8 · Court of Criminal Appeal
Principle
Facts
Doctor; patient died after prolonged labour. Set early gross-negligence threshold.
Held
Quashed. Phrasing: "disregard for life and safety of others amounting to a crime".
Ratio
Original gross-negligence threshold phrasing — still cited within Adomako test.
Non-Fatal Offences
⚖ Leading
R v Belfon
[1976] 1 WLR 741 · Court of Appeal
MR
Facts
The defendant slashed the victim's face with a razor; convicted of s.18.
Held
s.18 requires specific intent to cause GBH — foresight of GBH alone insufficient.
Ratio
s.18 OAPA: specific intent to cause GBH required (not mere foresight).
🔒
In build
Non-Fatal Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
General Elements
★ Classic⚖ Leading✓ Free sample
R v Blaue
[1975] 1 WLR 1411 · Court of Appeal
Causation
Facts
Jehovah's Witness refused blood transfusion after being stabbed. She died.
Held
The defendant was guilty of manslaughter. The thin skull rule applied to religious beliefs as well as physical conditions.
Ratio
"Thin skull" rule: defendants take their victims as they find them — including beliefs and convictions.
R v BM
[2018] EWCA Crim 560 · Court of Appeal
Defence
Facts
Tattooist performed body modifications (tongue split, ear removal).
Held
Consent not a defence to ABH/wounding via body modification.
Ratio
Body modification by a tattooist is not analogous to surgery; consent is no defence.
🔒
In build
Defences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Defences
★ Classic⚖ Leading
R v Brown
[1994] 1 AC 212 · House of Lords
Defence
Facts
Group of men consensually engaged in sado-masochistic acts; recorded harm.
Held
Consent no defence to ABH/wounding outside recognised public-policy exceptions.
Ratio
Consent does not extend to actual bodily harm or wounding outside recognised exceptions.
🔒
In build
Defences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Davidge v Bunnett
[1984] Crim LR 297 · Divisional Court
AR
Facts
The defendant given cheques by flatmates to pay gas bills; spent on Christmas presents.
Held
Money was held on trust for specific purpose under s.5(3) Theft Act 1968.
Ratio
Money received for a specific purpose is held on trust — misappropriation = theft.
🔒
In build
Property Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Non-Fatal Offences
★ Classic⚖ Leading
R v Burstow
[1998] AC 147 · House of Lords
AR
Facts
The defendant stalked the victim for years; she developed severe depression.
Held
Stalking can "inflict" GBH under s.20 OAPA 1861.
Ratio
Psychiatric injury can be GBH; "inflict" does not require direct force.
🔒
In build
Non-Fatal Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Diminished Responsibility
★ Classic⚖ Leading
R v Byrne
[1960] 2 QB 396 · Court of Appeal
Principle
Facts
Sexual psychopath strangled and mutilated a young woman.
Held
"Abnormality of mind" covers all aspects of mental activity, including impulse control.
Ratio
Abnormality of mind/mental functioning includes the ability to control physical impulses.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 4 — Diminished Responsibility · £6.99
Buy Topic 4 → £6.99
Non-Fatal Offences
⚖ Leading
R v Chan Fook
[1994] 1 WLR 689 · Court of Appeal
AR
Facts
The defendant locked the victim in upstairs room; the victim jumped from window in panic.
Held
ABH includes psychiatric injury but excludes mere distress or fear.
Ratio
ABH includes recognised psychiatric conditions — not mere emotions.
🔒
In build
Non-Fatal Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
General Elements
★ Classic⚖ Leading✓ Free sample
R v Cheshire
[1991] 1 WLR 844 · Court of Appeal
Causation
Facts
Victim died from rare medical complication after surgery for gunshot wounds. The defendant argued medical treatment broke the chain.
Held
Conviction upheld. Medical negligence only breaks the chain if it is so independent of the defendant's act as to make the defendant's contribution insignificant.
Ratio
Medical treatment is highly unlikely to break the chain of causation unless palpably wrong AND the sole significant cause.
Unlawful Act MS
★ Classic⚖ Leading
R v Church
[1966] 1 QB 59 · Court of Criminal Appeal
Principle
Facts
The defendant thought he had killed the victim (he had only knocked her unconscious); threw "body" in river. The victim drowned.
Held
Guilty of manslaughter. Dangerous-act test: would all sober and reasonable people recognise risk of some harm.
Ratio
Objective dangerousness test for UAM — risk of some harm, not the actual harm.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 5 — Unlawful Act MS · £6.99
Buy Topic 5 → £6.99
Loss of Control
⚖ Leading⌚ Modern
R v Clinton, Parker & Evans
[2012] EWCA Crim 2 · Court of Appeal
Principle
Facts
Three appeals on whether sexual infidelity could ever be relevant to LOC under s.55(6)(c) Coroners and Justice Act 2009.
Held
Sexual infidelity excluded as a trigger, but may form part of the context for other triggers.
Ratio
Sexual infidelity is excluded as a stand-alone qualifying trigger but may colour the context.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 3 — Loss of Control · £6.99
Buy Topic 3 → £6.99
R v Clouden
[1987] Crim LR 56 · Court of Appeal
AR
Facts
The defendant wrenched the victim's shopping bag from her grip.
Held
Snatching can involve sufficient force on the person.
Ratio
Force directed at property requiring overcoming the victim's grip qualifies as robbery force.
🔒
In build
Property Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Property Offences
★ Classic
R v Collins (1973)
[1973] QB 100 · Court of Appeal
AR
Facts
Naked the defendant climbed ladder to the victim's window; the victim mistook him for boyfriend.
Held
Conviction quashed. "Entry" must be "effective and substantial" (later lowered).
Ratio
Burglary entry must initially be effective and substantial; the defendant must know he is a trespasser.
🔒
In build
Property Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
R v Constanza
[1997] 2 Cr App R 492 · Court of Appeal
AR
Facts
The defendant sent the victim hundreds of threatening letters; the victim developed clinical depression.
Held
Letters can be assault if the victim apprehends violence in the near future.
Ratio
"Immediate" violence for assault includes the very near future, not just instantaneous.
🔒
In build
Non-Fatal Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
General Elements
★ Classic⚖ Leading✓ Free sample
R v Cunningham
[1957] 2 QB 396 · Court of Appeal
MR
Facts
The defendant stole gas meter; gas leaked into neighbour's house, poisoning her.
Held
Defined subjective recklessness: foresight of risk + taking it.
Ratio
Cunningham (subjective) recklessness — the defendant must personally foresee the risk.
R v Cunningham
[1981] 2 All ER 863 · House of Lords
MR
Facts
The defendant struck the victim with chair causing fatal injuries; intended GBH.
Held
Guilty of murder. Confirmed GBH-only intent sufficient.
Ratio
Express affirmation that intent to cause GBH suffices for murder.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 2 — Murder · £6.99
Buy Topic 2 → £6.99
R v Dawes, Hatter & Bowyer
[2013] EWCA Crim 322 · Court of Appeal
Principle
Facts
Three appeals on the qualifying triggers under s.55 Coroners and Justice Act 2009.
Held
"Things said or done" trigger requires objective justification — not mere insults or self-induced disputes.
Ratio
Qualifying triggers must be objectively justified and not self-induced.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 3 — Loss of Control · £6.99
Buy Topic 3 → £6.99
R v Dawson
(1985) 81 Cr App R 150 · Court of Appeal
Principle
Facts
Armed robbery; petrol station attendant with weak heart died of heart attack.
Held
Conviction quashed. Hidden weakness not relevant unless reasonably apparent.
Ratio
Dangerousness test is objective — the victim's hidden vulnerabilities do not count unless apparent.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 5 — Unlawful Act MS · £6.99
Buy Topic 5 → £6.99
R v Dear
[1996] Crim LR 595 · Court of Appeal
Causation
Facts
The victim chose not to seek medical help (and possibly reopened wounds) after being slashed by the defendant.
Held
Conviction upheld. The victim's neglect of own treatment did not break the chain.
Ratio
The victim's failure to seek treatment does not break the chain where the wound is still operating.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 1 — General Elements · £6.99
Buy Topic 1 → £6.99
Non-Fatal Offences
⌚ Modern
R v Dica
[2004] EWCA Crim 1103 · Court of Appeal
MR
Facts
The defendant knowingly transmitted HIV through unprotected sex without disclosure.
Held
Guilty of s.20 GBH. Recklessness shown.
Ratio
Reckless transmission of HIV can be s.20 GBH.
🔒
In build
Non-Fatal Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Diminished Responsibility
⚖ Leading
R v Dietschmann
[2003] UKHL 10 · House of Lords
Principle
Facts
The defendant was killed the victim; suffered from depression AND was intoxicated.
Held
Jury should consider whether abnormality alone (ignoring drink) substantially impaired responsibility.
Ratio
Where both abnormality and intoxication operate, jury asks if abnormality alone substantially impaired the defendant.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 4 — Diminished Responsibility · £6.99
Buy Topic 4 → £6.99
Haystead v DPP
[2000] 3 All ER 890 · Divisional Court
MR
Facts
The defendant was punched mother holding baby; she dropped baby.
Held
Guilty of battery on baby via transferred malice.
Ratio
Battery transferable — force on V1 reaching V2 founds liability.
🔒
In build
Non-Fatal Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
R v Dytham
[1979] QB 722 · Court of Appeal
Omission
Facts
Off-duty officer in uniform witnessed a fatal assault and did nothing.
Held
Guilty of misconduct in public office. Duty of office arose.
Ratio
Public office duty founds liability for failure to act.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 1 — General Elements · £6.99
Buy Topic 1 → £6.99
Non-Fatal Offences
★ Classic
JCC v Eisenhower
[1984] QB 331 · Divisional Court
AR
Facts
The defendant shot the victim with airgun pellet which broke a blood vessel in eye.
Held
Not a wound — internal bleeding without break of skin layers.
Ratio
"Wound" under OAPA 1861 requires breaking both layers of skin.
🔒
In build
Non-Fatal Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Gross Negligence MS
⚖ Leading⌚ Modern✓ Free sample
R v Evans
[2009] EWCA Crim 650 · Court of Appeal
Principle
Facts
The defendant supplied heroin to half-sister; the victim overdosed; the defendant did nothing.
Held
Duty arose from creating the life-threatening situation.
Ratio
Creating or contributing to a life-threatening situation founds a duty to take reasonable steps.
General Elements
★ Classic⚖ Leading⌚ Modern✓ Free sample
R v G
[2003] UKHL 50 · House of Lords
MR
Facts
Two boys aged 11 and 12 set fire to shop; significant damage. Restored subjective recklessness for criminal damage.
Held
Convictions quashed. Overruled R v Caldwell's objective test.
Ratio
Subjective recklessness restored — the defendant must personally foresee the risk, not merely "a reasonable adult would".
R v Gibbins & Proctor
(1918) 13 Cr App R 134 · Court of Criminal Appeal
Omission
Facts
Father and live-in partner failed to feed child; child died of starvation.
Held
Both guilty of murder. Father's natural duty + Proctor's voluntary assumption.
Ratio
Parental duty (natural) and voluntary assumption of care both found omission liability.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 1 — General Elements · £6.99
Buy Topic 1 → £6.99
General Elements
⌚ Modern
R v Gnango
[2011] UKSC 59 · Supreme Court
MRJoint/Attempt
Facts
The defendants shot at each other in car park; bystander killed by other shooter.
Held
Conviction upheld via transferred malice + joint enterprise.
Ratio
Transferred malice + joint enterprise can found murder of an unintended bystander.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 1 — General Elements · £6.99
Buy Topic 1 → £6.99
Diminished Responsibility
⚖ Leading⌚ Modern
R v Golds
[2016] UKSC 61 · Supreme Court
Principle
Facts
The defendant was killed his partner; trial judge gave guidance on the meaning of "substantial" impairment.
Held
"Substantial" means "important or weighty" — not merely more than trivial.
Ratio
"Substantial impairment" under HA 1957 s.2 (as amended) is more than de minimis.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 4 — Diminished Responsibility · £6.99
Buy Topic 4 → £6.99
Property Offences
★ Classic⚖ Leading
R v Gomez
[1993] AC 442 · House of Lords
AR
Facts
Manager assisted purchase using stolen cheques; owner consented to transfer.
Held
Consent of owner does not negate appropriation.
Ratio
Appropriation can occur even where owner consents (overrules narrow interpretation of Morris).
🔒
In build
Property Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
R v Goodfellow
[1986] 83 Cr App R 23 · Court of Appeal
Principle
Facts
The defendant set fire to own flat to be rehoused; three people died.
Held
Guilty of UAM. Unlawful act need not be directed at the victim.
Ratio
UAM unlawful act need not be aimed at the eventual victim.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 5 — Unlawful Act MS · £6.99
Buy Topic 5 → £6.99
R v Groark
[2014] EWCA Crim 2540 · Court of Appeal
Principle
Facts
The defendant was killed the victim; argued fear-of-violence trigger via drug-induced delusion.
Held
Self-induced delusion from voluntary intoxication cannot found a qualifying trigger.
Ratio
Voluntarily-intoxicated delusions cannot form the basis of a LOC qualifying trigger.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 3 — Loss of Control · £6.99
Buy Topic 3 → £6.99
R v Hale
(1979) 68 Cr App R 415 · Court of Appeal
AR
Facts
The defendant entered house, stole jewellery, then tied up householder.
Held
Appropriation is a continuing act — force during escape was "at the time of stealing".
Ratio
Appropriation continues during a reasonable period — force can be used "at the time of" stealing later.
🔒
In build
Property Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
R v Hardie
[1985] 1 WLR 64 · Court of Appeal
Defence
Facts
The defendant took diazepam to calm down; later set fire to a flat.
Held
Voluntary intoxication by non-dangerous drug does not necessarily import recklessness.
Ratio
Voluntary intoxication by non-dangerous drug (sedative): jury asks if the defendant was aware of risk.
🔒
In build
Defences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
R v Hayward
(1908) 21 Cox 692 · Assizes
Causation
Facts
The defendant chased wife who had a thyroid condition; she collapsed and died from shock.
Held
Guilty of manslaughter. Thin skull applied.
Ratio
The defendant must take the victim as he finds them, including hidden physical vulnerabilities.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 1 — General Elements · £6.99
Buy Topic 1 → £6.99
R v Heard
[2007] EWCA Crim 125 · Court of Appeal
MRDefence
Facts
Drunk the defendant rubbed his penis on officer's leg; charged with sexual assault.
Held
Voluntary intoxication no defence — sexual assault is basic intent.
Ratio
Sexual assault is a crime of basic intent — voluntary intoxication is no defence.
🔒
In build
Defences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Property Offences
⚖ Leading
R v Hinks
[2001] 2 AC 241 · House of Lords
AR
Facts
The defendant befriended vulnerable man; received "gifts" totalling £60,000.
Held
Appropriation occurs even with consent or valid gift if dishonest.
Ratio
Theft appropriation can occur even where civil-law transfer is valid (gift).
🔒
In build
Property Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
General Elements
⌚ Modern
R v Hughes
[2013] UKSC 56 · Supreme Court
Causation
Facts
Uninsured driver hit by oncoming car; argued his unlawful presence was not the cause of death.
Held
Conviction quashed. Mere unlawful presence is not a legal cause.
Ratio
Causation requires more than "but for" presence — the defendant's act must contribute substantively to the death.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 1 — General Elements · £6.99
Buy Topic 1 → £6.99
R v Inglis
[2010] EWCA Crim 2637 · Court of Appeal
MR
Facts
Mother injected morphine into brain-damaged son to end his suffering.
Held
Guilty of murder. Mercy is no defence.
Ratio
Mercy killing is murder where express malice is proved — compassionate motive irrelevant.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 2 — Murder · £6.99
Buy Topic 2 → £6.99
Non-Fatal Offences
★ Classic⚖ Leading
R v Ireland
[1998] AC 147 · House of Lords
AR
Facts
The defendant made silent phone calls causing psychiatric injury.
Held
Silent calls can amount to assault; psychiatric injury is bodily harm.
Ratio
Words/silence can constitute assault; psychiatric injury qualifies as ABH.
🔒
In build
Non-Fatal Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
R v Jewell
[2014] EWCA Crim 414 · Court of Appeal
Principle
Facts
The defendant shot the victim; argued loss of control via premeditated revenge planning.
Held
Premeditation incompatible with loss of self-control. LOC defence rejected.
Ratio
Loss of self-control under s.54 Coroners and Justice Act 2009 requires a loss of the ability to act in accordance with considered judgment.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 3 — Loss of Control · £6.99
Buy Topic 3 → £6.99
General Elements
★ Classic✓ Free sample
R v Jordan
(1956) 40 Cr App R 152 · Court of Criminal Appeal
Causation
Facts
Victim of stabbing died eight days later from "palpably wrong" medical treatment after wound had largely healed.
Held
Conviction quashed. Treatment was a novus actus interveniens.
Ratio
Palpably wrong medical treatment can break the chain of causation where the original wound has substantially healed.
DPP v K
[1990] 1 WLR 1067 · Divisional Court
AR
Facts
Schoolboy hid sulphuric acid in hand dryer; later user injured.
Held
Battery committed — no direct contact required.
Ratio
Indirect application of force can constitute battery.
🔒
In build
Non-Fatal Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Unlawful Act MS
⚖ Leading⌚ Modern
R v Kennedy (No 2)
[2007] UKHL 38 · House of Lords
Causation
Facts
The defendant prepared heroin syringe; the victim self-injected and died.
Held
Conviction quashed. The victim's free and informed adult act of self-injection broke the chain.
Ratio
A free, informed, voluntary act by an adult breaks the chain of causation in drug-supply cases.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 5 — Unlawful Act MS · £6.99
Buy Topic 5 → £6.99
R v Kimsey
[1996] Crim LR 35 · Court of Appeal
Causation
Facts
Two girls racing in cars; one crashed and died. The defendant's role in causation discussed.
Held
Sufficient if the defendant's act was "a significant contribution", not necessarily the sole cause.
Ratio
Legal cause: "more than a slight or trifling link" between act and consequence.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 1 — General Elements · £6.99
Buy Topic 1 → £6.99
R v Larsonneur
(1933) 24 Cr App R 74 · Court of Criminal Appeal
AR
Facts
The defendant was forcibly brought back to the UK by Irish police. Convicted of being "found" in the UK.
Held
Conviction upheld despite involuntary presence. State-of-affairs offence.
Ratio
Strict liability state-of-affairs offences do not require voluntariness.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 1 — General Elements · £6.99
Buy Topic 1 → £6.99
General Elements
★ Classic⚖ Leading✓ Free sample
R v Latimer
(1886) 17 QBD 359 · Court of Crown Cases Reserved
MR
Facts
The defendant swung belt at man in pub; belt bounced and hit a woman, scarring her.
Held
Guilty of wounding. Malice transferred from intended to actual victim.
Ratio
Transferred malice applies where AR and MR concern the same type of offence.
R v Le Brun
[1992] QB 61 · Court of Appeal
ARMR
Facts
The defendant was punched wife; she fell; the defendant was tried to move "body" and accidentally dropped her, killing her.
Held
Guilty of manslaughter. One-transaction principle applied.
Ratio
Transaction principle: MR formed during a chain of acts where the final act causes death.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 1 — General Elements · £6.99
Buy Topic 1 → £6.99
R v Lloyd
[1985] QB 829 · Court of Appeal
MR
Facts
Projectionist borrowed films briefly to make pirate copies.
Held
Not theft. Borrowing without depleting goodness/virtue ≠ intent permanently to deprive.
Ratio
s.6 includes intention to return in such altered state that goodness/virtue is gone.
🔒
In build
Property Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
R v Lockley
[1995] 2 Cr App R 554 · Court of Appeal
AR
Facts
The defendant caught shoplifting; used force to escape.
Held
Theft was still continuing — force during escape qualified for robbery.
Ratio
Theft is a continuing act for the purposes of robbery force.
🔒
In build
Property Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
R v Malcherek & Steel
[1981] 1 WLR 690 · Court of Appeal
Causation
Facts
The defendants was attacked the victims who were placed on life support; doctors later switched off machines.
Held
Convictions upheld. Switching off life support did not break the chain.
Ratio
Discontinuation of life support by qualified doctors is not a novus actus interveniens.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 1 — General Elements · £6.99
Buy Topic 1 → £6.99
R v Marjoram
[2000] Crim LR 372 · Court of Appeal
Causation
Facts
Hostel resident jumped from window after the defendants banged on door and shouted abuse.
Held
Conviction upheld. Reaction within range of reasonable responses.
Ratio
Apply the objective reasonable-foreseeability test from Williams & Davis.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 1 — General Elements · £6.99
Buy Topic 1 → £6.99
R v Martin (Tony)
[2002] 1 Cr App R 27 · Court of Appeal
Defence
Facts
Householder shot fleeing burglar in the back; killed him.
Held
Force was not proportionate — disproportionate force not self-defence.
Ratio
Self-defence force must be proportionate to the threat as the defendant believed it.
🔒
In build
Defences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
R v Matthews & Alleyne
[2003] EWCA Crim 192 · Court of Appeal
MR
Facts
The defendants threw the victim from bridge into river; the victim drowned. Asked whether Woollin was rule of law or evidence.
Held
Woollin direction is rule of evidence — jury "may find" intent, not "must".
Ratio
Virtual certainty is evidence from which intent may be inferred — not a substantive rule equating to intent.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 1 — General Elements · £6.99
Buy Topic 1 → £6.99
General Elements
★ Classic⚖ Leading
Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner
[1969] 1 QB 439 · Divisional Court
ARMR
Facts
The defendant drove onto police officer's foot accidentally, then refused to move.
Held
Guilty of battery. Continuing actus reus coincided with later mens rea.
Ratio
"Continuing act" doctrine — actus reus continues, allowing MR to coincide later.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 1 — General Elements · £6.99
Buy Topic 1 → £6.99
General Elements
★ Classic⚖ Leading✓ Free sample
R v Miller
[1983] 2 AC 161 · House of Lords
OmissionAR
Facts
The defendant fell asleep with lit cigarette; awoke to find mattress smouldering; left the room.
Held
Guilty of arson by omission. Created the danger, then failed to mitigate.
Ratio
Where the defendant creates a dangerous situation, a duty arises to take reasonable steps to avert harm.
Gross Negligence MS
⌚ Modern✓ Free sample
R v Misra & Srivastava
[2004] EWCA Crim 2375 · Court of Appeal
Principle
Facts
Two doctors failed to diagnose post-operative infection.
Held
Convictions upheld. Adomako test satisfies Article 7 ECHR.
Ratio
The Adomako test is sufficiently precise to satisfy Article 7 (no punishment without law).
R v Mitchell
[1983] QB 741 · Court of Appeal
Principle
Facts
The defendant pushed elderly man in post office queue; he fell on a woman who died.
Held
Guilty of UAM. Transferred malice applies in UAM.
Ratio
Transferred malice applies to UAM — unlawful act + dangerousness + causation = liability.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 5 — Unlawful Act MS · £6.99
Buy Topic 5 → £6.99
General Elements
★ Classic⚖ Leading✓ Free sample
R v Mohan
[1976] QB 1 · Court of Appeal
MR
Facts
The defendant drove at police officer signalling him to stop. Defined direct intent.
Held
Direct intent means "a decision to bring about" the prohibited consequence.
Ratio
Direct intent is the conscious decision to bring about the result — desire is irrelevant.
Property Offences
★ Classic
R v Morris
[1984] AC 320 · House of Lords
AR
Facts
The defendant switched price labels to pay less.
Held
Appropriation = assumption of ANY right of owner, not necessarily all rights.
Ratio
Appropriation is the assumption of any one or more of the rights of an owner.
🔒
In build
Property Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
R v Morrison
[1989] 89 Cr App R 17 · Court of Appeal
MR
Facts
Officer's grasp loosened by the defendant as the defendant leapt through window. Officer's face badly cut by glass.
Held
s.18 requires either intent to cause GBH or to resist arrest — clarified ulterior intent.
Ratio
s.18: alternative intents include resisting/preventing lawful detention.
🔒
In build
Non-Fatal Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Non-Fatal Offences
★ Classic
R v Mowatt
[1968] 1 QB 421 · Court of Appeal
MR
Facts
The defendant hit the victim over head causing serious cuts.
Held
For s.20, foresight of "some physical harm" suffices — not GBH foresight.
Ratio
s.20 OAPA: Cunningham recklessness as to some harm (not GBH).
🔒
In build
Non-Fatal Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
General Elements
★ Classic
R v Nedrick
[1986] 1 WLR 1025 · Court of Appeal
MR
Facts
The defendant poured paraffin through letterbox and set it alight; child died. Pre-Woollin guidance.
Held
Established the "virtual certainty" test for oblique intent — refined by Woollin.
Ratio
Oblique intent (pre-Woollin): jury entitled to infer intent if the defendant foresaw death/GBH as virtually certain.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 1 — General Elements · £6.99
Buy Topic 1 → £6.99
Unlawful Act MS
★ Classic⚖ Leading
R v Newbury & Jones
[1977] AC 500 · House of Lords
MRPrinciple
Facts
Teenagers pushed paving stone from railway bridge; train guard killed.
Held
Guilty of UAM. Mens rea of unlawful act alone sufficient — foresight of harm not required.
Ratio
UAM requires only MR of the unlawful act, not foresight of harm to the victim.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 5 — Unlawful Act MS · £6.99
Buy Topic 5 → £6.99
General Elements
★ Classic✓ Free sample
R v Pagett
(1983) 76 Cr App R 279 · Court of Appeal
Causation
Facts
The defendant used his pregnant girlfriend as a human shield against police. Police returned fire and killed her.
Held
The defendant's act was the operating and substantial cause; reasonable police response did not break the chain.
Ratio
A reasonable, lawful response by a third party is not a novus actus interveniens.
General Elements
★ Classic✓ Free sample
R v Pembliton
(1874) LR 2 CCR 119 · Court of Crown Cases Reserved
MR
Facts
The defendant threw stone at men; stone broke window. Different offence types.
Held
Not guilty of malicious damage. Malice cannot transfer between offence types.
Ratio
Limit on transferred malice: malice does not transfer between different types of offence.
General Elements
★ Classic✓ Free sample
R v Pittwood
(1902) 19 TLR 37 · Assizes
OmissionAR
Facts
Railway-gate keeper failed to close gate before train passed; cart-driver killed.
Held
Guilty of manslaughter. Contractual duty to act founded liability.
Ratio
A contractual duty to act founds criminal liability where breach causes death.
General Elements
★ Classic
R v Roberts
(1971) 56 Cr App R 95 · Court of Appeal
CausationMR
Facts
Victim jumped from the defendant's moving car to escape his sexual advances and was injured.
Held
The defendant was guilty of ABH. The victim's reaction was reasonably foreseeable.
Ratio
The victim's escape response will not break the chain of causation unless it is "daft" or unforeseeable.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 1 — General Elements · £6.99
Buy Topic 1 → £6.99
R v Robinson
[1977] Crim LR 173 · Court of Appeal
MRDefence
Facts
The defendant demanded money from the victim believing he was owed it.
Held
Conviction of robbery quashed — honest belief in legal right negates dishonesty.
Ratio
s.2(1)(a) Theft Act 1968 honest belief in legal right is a defence to dishonesty (and hence robbery).
🔒
In build
Property Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Gross Negligence MS
⚖ Leading⌚ Modern✓ Free sample
R v Rose
[2017] EWCA Crim 1168 · Court of Appeal
Principle
Facts
Optometrist missed brain tumour during eye test; child died.
Held
Conviction quashed. Foreseeability of death must be assessed on facts known at the breach.
Ratio
Stage 3 of Adomako requires foreseeability of a serious and obvious risk of DEATH at the time of breach.
R v Ryan
[1996] Crim LR 320 · Court of Appeal
AR
Facts
The defendant got stuck in window head-and-arm only; argued not effective entry.
Held
Guilty. Effective-and-substantial requirement weakened.
Ratio
Partial entry can be sufficient for burglary; lowered Collins threshold.
🔒
In build
Property Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
DPP v Santana-Bermudez
[2003] EWHC 2908 (Admin) · Divisional Court
AR
Facts
The defendant lied about needles in pocket; officer searched and was stabbed.
Held
Created the danger; failure to warn was battery.
Ratio
Creating a danger and failing to warn can found battery.
🔒
In build
Non-Fatal Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Non-Fatal Offences
★ Classic⚖ Leading
R v Savage; DPP v Parmenter
[1992] 1 AC 699 · House of Lords
MR
Facts
Joined appeals on the mens rea of s.47 ABH and s.20 GBH.
Held
s.47: MR of assault/battery suffices. s.20: foresight of some harm (Cunningham recklessness).
Ratio
s.47 ABH = MR of underlying assault/battery only. s.20 GBH = Cunningham recklessness as to some harm.
🔒
In build
Non-Fatal Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Unlawful Act MS
★ Classic
R v Sheehan & Moore
[1975] 1 WLR 739 · Court of Appeal
MRDefence
Facts
Drunk the defendants poured petrol on a tramp and set him alight; convicted of murder.
Held
Murder reduced to manslaughter — intoxication negated specific intent.
Ratio
Voluntary intoxication may reduce murder to manslaughter (basic intent).
🔒
Unlock
Topic 5 — Unlawful Act MS · £6.99
Buy Topic 5 → £6.99
Gross Negligence MS
✓ Free sample
R v Singh
[1999] EWCA Crim 460 · Court of Appeal
Principle
Facts
Property manager; tenant died of carbon monoxide from defective gas fire.
Held
Standard of care is that of a reasonable landlord — objective in the defendant's role.
Ratio
GNM standard of care is the reasonably competent person in the defendant's role.
General Elements
★ Classic⚖ Leading✓ Free sample
R v Smith
[1959] 2 QB 35 · Court of Martial Appeal
Causation
Facts
Soldier stabbed; received poor medical treatment and died. Original wound was still significant cause.
Held
Conviction upheld. The wound need not be the sole cause — merely operating and substantial.
Ratio
The original wound is a legal cause if it is still "operating and substantial" at the time of death.
Non-Fatal Offences
★ Classic
DPP v Smith
[1961] AC 290 · House of Lords
AR
Facts
Defined GBH (and intent for murder before being overruled).
Held
GBH means "really serious harm". Murder-intent test reversed by s.8 CJA 1967.
Ratio
"GBH" means really serious harm — the standard definition.
🔒
In build
Non-Fatal Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
General Elements
★ Classic✓ Free sample
R v Stone & Dobinson
[1977] QB 354 · Court of Appeal
Omission
Facts
The defendant and partner took in elderly relative who became ill; failed to summon help.
Held
Both guilty of manslaughter. Voluntary assumption of care created a duty.
Ratio
Voluntary assumption of care for a helpless adult creates a duty to act.
Diminished Responsibility
★ Classic
R v Tandy
[1989] 1 WLR 350 · Court of Appeal
Principle
Facts
Alcoholic mother killed daughter; argued alcoholism alone amounted to abnormality.
Held
Alcoholism alone insufficient unless first drink of the day involuntary.
Ratio
Chronic alcoholism requires loss of control over first drink to found DR (refined by Wood).
🔒
Unlock
Topic 4 — Diminished Responsibility · £6.99
Buy Topic 4 → £6.99
R v Turner (No 2)
[1971] 1 WLR 901 · Court of Appeal
AR
Facts
The defendant took own car from garage where it was left for repairs.
Held
Guilty of theft. Garage's possession sufficed for "belonging to another".
Ratio
Property "belongs to another" if another has possession or control, even if the defendant owns it.
🔒
In build
Property Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Property Offences
⚖ Leading⌚ Modern
Ivey v Genting Casinos
[2017] UKSC 67 · Supreme Court
MR
Facts
Professional gambler used edge-sorting technique in baccarat.
Held
New objective two-stage test for dishonesty.
Ratio
Test: (1) the defendant's actual state of knowledge/belief; (2) dishonest by standards of ordinary decent people.
🔒
In build
Property Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
B & S v Leathley
[1979] Crim LR 314 · Crown Court
AR
Facts
Freezer container with locked doors used for two years.
Held
Counted as a "building" for burglary purposes.
Ratio
Structure with degree of permanence can be a "building" for s.9 burglary.
🔒
In build
Property Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
General Elements
★ Classic
Thabo Meli v R
[1954] 1 WLR 228 · Privy Council
ARMR
Facts
The defendants beat the victim intending to kill, then threw "body" over a cliff; the victim died of exposure.
Held
Convictions upheld. Series of acts treated as one transaction.
Ratio
"One transaction" doctrine — MR at the time of first act suffices for the entire series.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 1 — General Elements · £6.99
Buy Topic 1 → £6.99
Non-Fatal Offences
★ Classic
Tuberville v Savage
(1669) 1 Mod Rep 3 · King's Bench
AR
Facts
The defendant placed hand on sword saying "if it were not assize time, I would not take such language".
Held
No assault — words negated the threat.
Ratio
Words can negate what would otherwise be an assault.
🔒
In build
Non-Fatal Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
R v Velumyl
[1989] Crim LR 299 · Court of Appeal
MR
Facts
The defendant took money from company safe intending to repay with different notes.
Held
Guilty — intention to return different property = intention permanently to deprive.
Ratio
Returning equivalent value (not the same property) satisfies s.6 intention permanently to deprive.
🔒
In build
Property Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Murder
★ Classic⚖ Leading
R v Vickers
[1957] 2 QB 664 · Court of Appeal
MR
Facts
The defendant was killed elderly woman during burglary; only intended GBH.
Held
Guilty of murder. Implied malice (GBH intent) sufficient.
Ratio
Mens rea of murder includes both express (intent to kill) and implied (intent to cause GBH) malice.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 2 — Murder · £6.99
Buy Topic 2 → £6.99
Gross Negligence MS
⚖ Leading⌚ Modern✓ Free sample
R v Wacker
[2003] EWCA Crim 1944 · Court of Appeal
Principle
Facts
Lorry driver smuggling migrants closed only air vent; 58 suffocated.
Held
Duty of care owed despite joint illegal enterprise.
Ratio
Ex turpi causa does not apply in criminal law — duty owed even where the victim was a willing criminal participant.
R v Walkington
[1979] 1 WLR 1169 · Court of Appeal
AR
Facts
Customer entered restricted till area of a shop.
Held
Guilty of burglary — became trespasser to that part of the building.
Ratio
Burglary can be committed by trespass to a part of a building, not the whole.
🔒
In build
Property Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
R v Watson
[1989] 1 WLR 684 · Court of Appeal
Principle
Facts
Burglar realised the victim was frail elderly during burglary; the victim died of shock.
Held
Knowledge gained during unlawful act feeds into the dangerousness test.
Ratio
Dangerousness test takes account of knowledge the defendant gained during the unlawful act.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 5 — Unlawful Act MS · £6.99
Buy Topic 5 → £6.99
General Elements
★ Classic⚖ Leading✓ Free sample
R v White
[1910] 2 KB 124 · Court of Appeal
Causation
Facts
The defendant put cyanide in his mother's drink intending to kill her. She died of a heart attack before drinking it.
Held
No factual causation. The defendant was guilty of attempted murder only.
Ratio
Establishes the "but for" test for factual causation.
Non-Fatal Offences
★ Classic⚖ Leading
Collins v Wilcock
[1984] 1 WLR 1172 · Divisional Court
AR
Facts
Officer held the victim's arm to detain her; the victim scratched officer.
Held
Officer's touch was battery — exceeded ordinary lawful contact.
Ratio
Any intentional touching beyond ordinary lawful contact is battery.
🔒
In build
Non-Fatal Offences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Diminished Responsibility
⌚ Modern
R v Wilcocks
[2016] EWCA Crim 2043 · Court of Appeal
Principle
Facts
The defendant was killed in a sequence of events involving emotional distress; question over the "explanation" requirement.
Held
Jury must specifically consider whether the abnormality was a significant contributory factor.
Ratio
HA 1957 s.2(1B) "explanation" requirement must be addressed separately.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 4 — Diminished Responsibility · £6.99
Buy Topic 4 → £6.99
R v Williams & Davis
[1992] 1 WLR 380 · Court of Appeal
Causation
Facts
Hitchhiker jumped from moving car when the defendant allegedly tried to rob him. Refined the Roberts test.
Held
Test is whether the victim's response was within "a range of responses reasonable to expect".
Ratio
Foreseeability of the victim's response is measured against a range of reasonable victim reactions.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 1 — General Elements · £6.99
Buy Topic 1 → £6.99
R v Williams (Gladstone)
[1987] 3 All ER 411 · Court of Appeal
Defence
Facts
The defendant mistakenly believed the victim was attacking another; intervened with force.
Held
Self-defence judged on facts as the defendant honestly believed them to be.
Ratio
Self-defence assessed on the defendant's honest (even if unreasonable) belief about the facts.
🔒
In build
Defences (in build)
See bundles & pre-order interest
Diminished Responsibility
⌚ Modern
R v Wood
[2008] EWCA Crim 1305 · Court of Appeal
Principle
Facts
Alcohol-dependent the defendant was killed the victim; question whether the first drink of the day was voluntary.
Held
Alcohol Dependency Syndrome can amount to an abnormality of mental functioning even if first drink technically voluntary.
Ratio
ADS can amount to an abnormality of mental functioning — refined Tandy.
🔒
Unlock
Topic 4 — Diminished Responsibility · £6.99
Buy Topic 4 → £6.99
General Elements
★ Classic⚖ Leading✓ Free sample
R v Woollin
[1999] 1 AC 82 · House of Lords
MR
Facts
The defendant threw baby across room; baby died. Refined the oblique intent direction.
Held
Jury may find intent where death/GBH was virtually certain and the defendant appreciated this.
Ratio
Modern oblique intent direction: virtual certainty + the defendant's appreciation = may find intent.
