IV manslaughter

• Involuntary manslaughter arises when D lacks the MR for the murder, whether it is direct or indirect.
• To prove UAM... (R v Goodfellow)

  1. Did D commit an unlawful act?

  2. was the act objectively dangerous?

  3. Did the act cause death?

  4. did D have the necessary Mens Rea for the unlawful act? (was it intentional)
• Tort law is not sufficient for an unlawful act manslaughter (R v Franklin).
• If there is no unlawful act there cannot be UAM (R v Lamb).
• An unlawful act must be a positive voluntary act. an omission is not sufficient (R v Lowe).
• The church test states that all sober and reasonable people would inevitably recognise that the defendant's actions subject the other person to, at least, the risk of some harm, albeit not serious harm.
• The MR for unlawful act manslaughter is the same as the first unlawful act committed.
• The leading case for GNM is R v Adomako.
• The 4 tests in R v Adomako are...

  1. there must be a duty of care between D and V

  2. there must be a breach of this duty which causes death.

  3. the breach must be so grossly negligent that the jury consider it criminal.

  4. there must be a risk of death.
• The neighbour principle states that there is a duty of care is owed to anyone who is closely or directly affected by the defendant's actions (Donoghue v Stephenson).
• D is a landlord who owes a duty of care to his tenants (R v Singh).
• D owes a duty of care to someone if they are both jointly involved in criminal activity (R v Wacker).
• D is a captain that owes a duty of care to the people on his ship (R v Litchfield).
• The defendants owed a duty as they volunteered to take care of the victim in R v Stone and Dobinson.
• The defendant owed a duty through contractual employment in R v Pittwood.
• To prove breach of duty in GNM...

  1. Did D fail to do something or do something badly?

  2. Did this cause death? (factual,legal)
• Gross negligence is defined in R v Bateman as 'showing such a disregard for the life and safety of others as to amount to a crime'.
• The extent of negligence in GNM must be very high (Andrews v DPP).
• Harm does not need to be aimed at the victim (R v Mitchell)
• Physical harm must be intended, intimidation is not enough (R v Dawson)
• It is enough for harm to be aimed at property (R v Goodfellow)
• D does not have to have the intention to cause death (Newbury and Jones v DPP)