||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 519 (Jul)
|| EWCA Crim 1944
||Court of Appeal, Criminal Division
Kay LJ, Colman and Ouseley JJ
||Michael Lawson QC and Simon Russell Flint (instructed by Kirk Jackson Waitt) for the defendant.
||Victor Temple QC and Duncan Penny (instructed by HM Customs and Excise) for the Crown.
||Orlando Pownall QC (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Attorney General.
||31 July 2002
Criminal law - Manslaughter - Involuntary manslaughter - Breach of duty - Accused and deceased having engaged in joint criminal activity - Whether accused owing duty of care to deceased in circumstances - Whether judge having erred in failing to withdraw case from jury.
As a matter of public policy there was no justification for concluding that the criminal law should decline to hold a person as criminally responsible for the death of another simply because the two were engaged in some joint unlawful activity at the time or because there might have been an element of acceptance of a degree of risk by the victim in order to further the joint unlawful enterprise. Whether a duty of care arose in any particular case was to be judged by the same legal criteria as governed whether there was a duty of care in the law of negligence.
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary