1.1.1 A civil wrong is not
enough - there must be a
1.2 Lamb (1967)
1.2.1 The defendant and victim were
playing with a revolver. Neither
thought the gun would fire when a
bullet was not opposite the barrel. D
accidentally shot V, killing him.
18.104.22.168 There was no unlawful act -
the victim did not fear violence,
so there was no assault.
1.3 Khan and Khan (1998)
1.3.1 The defendants supplied a young prostitute with heroin, knowing
that she was a new user. She went into a coma, and the
defendants left the flat. When they returned the next day, she was
22.214.171.124 The omission of not getting help was
not enough for unlawful act
2 Dangerous act
2.1 Church (1966)
2.1.1 "The unlawful act must be such as
all sober and reasonable people
would inevitably recognise the act
would subject the other person to
at least some harm" - Edmund
2.2 Larkin (1943)
2.2.1 D threatened another man with a razor to
frighten him. The mistress of the other
man tried to intervene, but because she
was drunk, fell and landed on the blade,
cutting her throat and killing her.
126.96.36.199 The act of threatening the
man with a razor was
unlawful and dangerous -
some harm was likely to be
caused as a result.
2.3 Goodfellow (1986)
2.3.1 D set fire to his house so the
council would rehouse him. The
fire spread, killing three people.
188.8.131.52 The act can be aimed at property
as well as people.
2.4 Dawson (1985)
2.4.1 The three defendants attempted to rob a petrol
station. The station attendant had a heart attack
as a result and died.
184.108.40.206 The risk of harm includes causing a person to suffer
shock,but not mere emotional disturbance.
3 Act must cause death
3.1 Corion-Auguiste (2004)
3.1.1 D threw a firework into a crowded, enclosed
bus station causing people to rush for the
exits. In the panic, an elderly woman hit her
head and died.
220.127.116.11 D's act was a "direct and
substantial" cause of the
3.2 Cato (1976)
3.2.1 D and V prepared a mix of heroin and water, which
they both injected into each other.V died as a result.
18.104.22.168 "Administering a noxious
substance" was the direct cause
3.3 Kennedy (2007)
3.3.1 D prepared a syringe for V to inject
himself with. V injected himself and died.
22.214.171.124 V's act of injecting
himself broke the
chain of causation.
3.4 Shohid (2003)
3.4.1 D was part of a group of men who pushed V onto
a railway track. V was prevented from climbing
back onto the platform by the group of men, not
including D. He was killed by a train.
126.96.36.199 Even though the
original act of D was
not the sole cause of
death, or even a main
one, it was significantly
serious to be the legal
4 Mens rea for unlawful act
4.1 Newbury and Jones (1976)
4.1.1 Two teenage boys pushed a paving slab off of
a railway bridge as a train approached. It hit a
window and killed the guard.
188.8.131.52 It did not matter that D did not
foresee that his act may cause
harm to another or know that his
act was unlawful.
184.108.40.206 D must have realised what he was doing and had the
intention of doing it. The risk must have been obvious to
a reasonable adult of normal intelligence, but not
necessarily to D.