GNM

• Gross Negligence Manslaughter
• X is likely to be liable with involuntary manslaughter as X lacks the MR of murder. In particular, he is likely to be liable of gross negligence.
• The case of Adomako and more recently, Broughton provides that certain elements need to be met for liability of GNM.
• 1. Firstly, the D owed a duty of care to the victim e.g. Pittwood or Stone and Dobinson
• 2. Secondly, the D breached the duty

  For there to be a breach, the D should not have followed the standards of the reasonable competent person performing the activity involved. For example in Adomako, the D was judged against the standards of the reasonable competent anaethesist and a reasonable competent anaesthetist would not have done the same.
• 3. The breach must have caused the death - if causation then discuss it
• 4. At the time of the breach there was a serious and obvious risk of death.

  In Adomako, lord Mackey referred in his judgement to the risk of death but Singh and more recently Broughton have clarified that there needs to be a 'serious and obvious' risk of death.

  This is judged objectively. Broughton confirms that the serious and obvious risk of death had to be reasonably foreseeable at the time of the breach
• 5. The negligence (breach) needs to be gross negligence.

  The jury to be satisfied that the breach was exceptionally bad and so reprehensible for it to be considered criminal by the jury and not simply negligent. APPLY