qualifying trrigger

• Section 55 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 sets out the qualifying triggers for loss of control:

  • The defendant had a fear of violence that the victim would inflict violence on them or another identified person- section 55 ( 3 )
  • Something was said or done that constituted circumstances of an extremely grave character, or they caused the defendant to have a justified sense of being seriously wrong- section 55 (4)
• what is the significance of the case of r v ward?

  It shows how the defendant doesn't need to fear the victim inflicting harm on them; it the defendant can fear that the victim will inflict violence on another identified person.
• What case shows how the defendant doesn't need to fear the victim inflicting harm on them; it the defendant can fear that the victim will inflict violence on another identified person?

  r v Ward
• What does section 55(6) (A) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 say?

  Where the defendant incited the violence between themself and the victim, they cannot rely on their qualifying trigger of fear of violence.
• What section of which legislation says "Where the defendant incited the violence between themself and the victim, they cannot rely on their qualifying trigger of fear of violence."?

  Section 55 (6) (A) of the coroners and justice act 2009
• What is the significance of the case of r v dawes?

  it emphasises that if the defendant incited the violence between themself and the victim, they cannot rely on the qualifying trigger of fear of violence.
• What case emphasises that if the defendant incited the violence between themself and the victim, they cannot rely on the qualifying trigger of fear of violence?

  r v Dawes
• The question of whether the circumstances are extremely grave and whether the defendant had a justifiable sense of being seriously wrong is a question that should be judged objectively, and not as a matter of opinion.
• What cases give examples of where the defendants' circumstances were not extremely grave, nor did they have any justifiable sense of being wrong?

  r v bowyer and r v zebedee
• What cases show that sexual infidelity does not count as a qualifying trigger?

  R v dawes and r v Clinton
• What is the siignificance of the casdes of R v dawes and r v Clinton

  Both cases show that sexual infidelity do not count as a qualifying trigger for loss of control.
• What does section 55 6 A of the corners and justice act 2009 say?

  Sexual infidelity can never be a qualifying trigger for loss of control
• Which section of what legislation states that Sexual infidelity can never be a qualifying trigger for loss of control?

  Section 55 6 a of the coroners and justice act 2009
• which section of which legislation states that if D acted in a considered desire for revenge, they can not rely on the defence of loss of control?

  Section 54 4 of the coroners and justice 2009
• What does Section 54 4 of the coroners and justice 2009 say?

  if D acted in a considered desire for revenge they can not rely on the defence of loss of control
• What is the significance of the case of r v ibrams and Gregory?

  it shows that if D acted in a considered desire for revenge they can not rely on the defence of loss of control.
• what case shows that if D acted in a considered desire for revenge, they can not rely on the Defence of loss of control?

  r v ibrams and gregory