Loss of Control

• What is the main focus of the study material regarding Voluntary Manslaughter?


  It explains Voluntary Manslaughter and its difference from Murder.
• What is the burden of proof in cases of Voluntary Manslaughter?


  The burden of proof is on D to show the defence applies.
• What happens if the defence of Voluntary Manslaughter is successful?


  If successful, the charge of murder is reduced to manslaughter.
• Which acts are relevant to the defence of Loss of Control?

  The Homicide Act 1957 and the Coroners & Justice Act 2009.
• What was the old common law defence of provocation replaced by?


  It was replaced by the new special partial defence of Loss of Control.
• How have changes to the law on Provocation improved the use of this defence?


  Changes have improved the use of this defence immeasurably.
• What are the elements of the old defence of Provocation under the Homicide Act 1957?


  • D was provoked by things said, done, or both.
  • Causing a sudden loss of control.
  • A reasonable person would have reacted similarly.
• What issues were highlighted by case law regarding the old defence of Provocation?


  Case law determined the extent of the elements and highlighted issues such as delayed responses.
• What was the outcome of the case Ahluwalia [1992] regarding provocation?


  Ahluwalia suffered a slow-burn effect.
• What was the significance of R v Duffy [1949] in relation to provocation?


  Her delayed response meant she was unable to use the defence.
• What did R v Doughty [1986] determine about provocation?


  A baby crying was considered a natural situation that counted as provocation.
• What was the ruling in R v Camplin [1978] regarding the age of the defendant?


  The age of the defendant was originally not considered until an appeal in this case.
• What did the Law Commission state about the defence of Provocation?


  The defence of Provocation is a confusing mixture of Judge-made Law and Legislative provision.
• What are the key elements of the new defence of Loss of Control under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009?


  • D suffered from a loss of self-control.
  • Caused by a qualifying trigger:
  • D's fear of serious violence from V.
  • Things said or done that constitute extremely grave circumstances.
  • Caused D to feel seriously wronged.
  • A normal person in D's circumstances might have reacted similarly.
• How does the requirement for loss of self-control differ between the old and new laws?


  The new law does not require the loss of self-control to be sudden.
• What is the significance of the case R v Ibrams & Gregory [1981] regarding loss of control?


  There was a time lapse of 5 days since provocation, indicating no defence if D acts out of revenge.
• What does s55(3) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 state about qualifying triggers?


  D's fear of serious violence from V against D or another is a qualifying trigger.
• How does the new law address the issue of sexual infidelity as a qualifying trigger?


  Sexual infidelity is disregarded as a qualifying trigger, but can support D's loss of control.
• What does the 'Normal Person' test entail under s54(1)(c)?


  A person of D's age and sex with normal tolerance and self-restraint might have reacted similarly.
• What are the key elements and cases related to Loss of Control?


  • Caused by a qualifying trigger:
  • D's fear of serious violence (R v Ahluwalia, R v Thornton).
  • Things said or done (R v Doughty, R v Zebedee).
  • Self-induced triggers are not valid (R v Dawes).
  • Normal person test (R v Camplin, R v Holley).
  • Loss of self-control does not need to be sudden (R v Ahluwalia, R v Thornton).
• What should be evaluated in the scenario statements regarding Carly and Tom?


  The accuracy of each statement regarding Carly's potential charges and defences should be evaluated.
• What should be included in a detailed essay plan regarding changes to the defence of Loss of Control?


  • Identify key changes to the defence.
  • Consider who benefits from the changes.
  • Evaluate whether the criteria is satisfactory.
  • Suggest further reform ideas.
• What is the purpose of the Snakes & Ladders game mentioned in the study material?


  • To test knowledge on cases, statutes, and elements.
  • To engage with peers by swapping games for added challenge.