Case link: Provocation – Hill [2008] EWCA Crim 76

“The CCRC referred his case to this court because, following the decision of the House of Lords in Morgan Smith [2001] 1 AC 146, and given a new assertion that the appellant had been the victim of childhood sexual abuse, there was doubt that the issue of provocation had properly been before the jury…”

To read the decision of the Court of Appeal click here

Links Click
CRIMINAL LAW RECORDED LECTURES, QUIZZES AND POWERPOINT PRESENTATIONS
Criminal Law Online
REVISION SEMINARS FOR LLB AND GDL STUDENTS QED LAW REVISION

Advertisements

Case link: Provocation – objective test – Attorney General for Jersey v Holley BAILII: [2005] UKPC 23

“This appeal from the Court of Appeal of Jersey calls for examination of the law relating to provocation as a defence or, more precisely, as a partial defence to a charge of murder. Jersey law on this subject is the same as English law. In July 2000 the House of Lords considered the ingredients of this defence in the Morgan Smith case (R v Smith (Morgan) [2001] 1 AC 146). The decision of the House in that case is in direct conflict with the decision of their Lordships’ Board in Luc Thiet Thuan v The Queen [1997] AC 131. And the reasoning of the majority in the Morgan Smith case is not easy to reconcile with the reasoning of the House of Lords in R v Camplin [1978] AC 705 or R v Morhall [1996] AC 90. This appeal, being heard by an enlarged Board of nine members, is concerned to resolve this conflict and clarify definitively the present state of English law, and hence Jersey law, on this important subject.”

To read the decision click here

Links Click
CRIMINAL LAW RECORDED LECTURES, QUIZZES AND POWERPOINT PRESENTATIONS
Criminal Law Online
REVISION SEMINARS FOR LLB AND GDL STUDENTS QED LAW REVISION

Case link: Manslaughter – gross negligence – Andrews v DPP – BAILII: [1937] UKHL 1 ; [1937] AC 576

“My Lords, of all crimes manslaughter appears to afford most difficulties of definition, for it concerns homicide in so many and so varying conditions. From the early days when any homicide involved penalty the law has gradually evolved ” through ” successive differentiations and integrations” until it recognises
murder on the one hand, based mainly though not exclusively on an intention to kill, and manslaughter on the other hand, based mainly though not exclusively, on the absence of intention to kill but with the presence of an element of ” unlawfulness ” which is the elusive factor.”

To read this case click here

Links Click
CRIMINAL LAW RECORDED LECTURES, QUIZZES AND POWERPOINT PRESENTATIONS
Criminal Law Online
REVISION SEMINARS FOR LLB AND GDL STUDENTS QED LAW REVISION

Case link: Murder – mens rea – Clarke [2006] EWCA Crim 3427

“The judge’s direction was wrong in a number of respects… It was wrong to refer to an act which sober and reasonable people would inevitably realise must subject the victim to at least the risk of some harm, although not necessarily serious harm. That direction was repeated on a number of occasions. It has no place in the definition of murder.”

To read the case click here

Links Click
CRIMINAL LAW RECORDED LECTURES, QUIZZES AND POWERPOINT PRESENTATIONS
Criminal Law Online
REVISION SEMINARS FOR LLB AND GDL STUDENTS QED LAW REVISION

Case link: Infanticide – Gore [2007] EWCA Crim 2789

“At the heart of this reference is the CCRC’s submission that a woman can only be convicted of infanticide under section 1(1) of the Infanticide Act 1938 if all the ingredients of murder are proved, in particular if the mens rea for murder is proved, namely an intention to kill or to cause really serious bodily harm.”

To read this report click here

Lecture presentation: Murder

This recorded lecture covers the following issues: an outline of sentencing for murder; the actus reus of murder; the acceleration of death; the meaning of ‘death’; brain stem death; what is meant by a human being ? ; the killing of a foetus and the decision in the A-G’s reference (No. 3 of 1994)(1997); the decision in A (conjoined twins)(2001); the Law Reform (Year and Day Rule) Act 1996; the mens rea of murder; outline of the proposals for reform.

Principal authorities include: Woollin (1998); Matthews; Alleyne (2003) Re A (Conjoined Twins)(2000); Airedale NHS Trust v Bland (1993); Malcherek; Steel (1981); Attorney General’s Reference (No. 3 of 1994) (1997); Vickers (1957).

Lecture time – 31 minutes

Includes a self test quiz of 20 questions.

To purchase this presentation click here

Lecture presentation: Manslaughter by gross negligence: Misra [2004] CA

This recorded lecture presentation considers the decision of the Court of Appeal in Misra [2004] concerning the law relating to manslaughter by gross negligence as explained in Adomako [1995]. The main issues covered include the elements of manslaughter by gross negligence; the requirement of legal certainty in article 7 of the ECHR; the right to a fair trial in article 6 of the ECHR; the impact of R v G [2004]; the question whether the test of liability for manslaughter by gross negligence is circular.

Cases discussed: Misra [2004]; Adomako [1995]; R v G [2004]

Lecture time – 17 minutes

Includes a self test quiz of 10 questions.

To purchase click here