Criminal Law Negligence
Negligence is the standard normally associated with civil law. It has a minor role in criminal law
Whilst it is sometimes referred to as part of main graia, it is questionable as to whether negligence is correctly classified as such
since it is concerned with the conduct of the defendants rather than their stated mind
It applies to some driving offences and great negligence manslaughter. It is decided objectively and questions whether the defendant's conduct met the standard of a reasonable man
This was seen in McCrone v. Riding 1938, where a learner driver was liable to the offence of driving without due care and attention
He had to meet the standard of a reasonable, qualified driver. No account could be taken of the fact that he was a learner
R. V. Adamarpe, 1994, is the leading case for gross negligence manslaughter
The appellant was an anaesthetist in charge of a patient during an eye operation
During the operation an oxygen pipe became disconnected and the patient died
The appellant failed to notice or respond to obvious signs of disconnection
His conviction for gross negligence manslaughter was upheld. According to R. V. Adamarpe, for gross negligence manslaughter
it must be established that the defendant, 1. Over-duty of car, 2. Was in breach of that duty, and 3. The breach of duty caused death
In addition, the jury should be directed in accordance with the Adamarpe Otest of
whether the conduct of the defendant was so bad in all the circumstances
as to amount in their judgement to a criminal act or a missing
The earlier case of R. V. Bateman, 1975, where a doctor's actions in assisting childbirth led to the death of the mother
made it clear that the civil standard of negligence is not enough
Lord Peer, the Lord Chief Justice stated, the negligence that he achieved went beyond a mere matter of compensation between subjects
and showed such disregard for the life and safety of others as to amount to a crime against the state and conducts deserving punishment
The Adamarpe Otest has been criticized for its circularity in that the jury are directed that it is a crime
if they think the conduct was so bad as to be a crime. Thus, it is essentially lost to the jury to decide the level of criminality
This point was challenged in R. V. Misga and Srivastava, 2005. However, the Court of Appeal held that it was compatible with convention rights
A duty of power encompasses civil law concepts of reasonable foresight and a relationship of proximity
A duty of power may arise from a relationship such as doctors
surgeons and other medical professionals with regards to their patients. This was seen in R. V. Bateman and R. V. Adamarpe
It could also be parents and child. For example, in R. V. Gibbons and Proctor
the father was liable for the death of his seven-year-old daughter, who starved to death, as he had a duty to ensure she was fed
A duty may also arise in relation to an omission. For example, where there was a voluntary assumption of responsibility
as in R. V. Stone and Dobinson where the defendant agreed to look after his sister
but then failed to do so. A further example of a duty arising from an omission
is where the defendant creates a dangerous situation. This was seen in R. V. Khan and Khan
where the brother supplied drugs to the victim and failed to summon help
when she showed obvious signs of overdose. Imposing civil law concepts in criminal law can prove problematic
For example, it seems incongruous to talk of a drug dealer's duty to take care of their clients
In the case of R. V. Wacker, it is held that the civil law defense of ex-terpit causa non orator atiae
no action can be founded on an illegal act, have no application in criminal law
This would have secluded liability if the victim was committing a crime
In R. V. Wacker, the defendant attempted to raise the defense, as the 58 people who suffocated in his lorry were illegally entering the retail
The court denied the defense and upheld his conviction. In summary, negligence liability in criminal law requires a duty of par and a brief deficiency
Some civil law concepts are incorporated, but the standard of par in relation to the brief is much more fundamental
Some civil concepts are excluded. To announce a gross negligence, the defendant's action must be so bad as to amount to a crime
This video is part of a series of videos on law from www.elawresources.co.uk
Please subscribe to our YouTube channel www.youtube.com slash at elawresources. It's free to do so and will help us to keep providing these videos
Check out our website which provides lecture outlines and case summaries. See also www.elawrevision.org.uk for revision days included
Thanks for watching