Monday, July 29, 2019

Should there be any liability for Omission in criminal Law and if so, Dissertation

Should there be any liability for Omission in criminal Law and if so, how much it should be extended and Why Penalties for Omiss - Dissertation Example In some jurisdictions, the penalty involves depriving the person of his life. Because the punitive nature of criminal laws invades upon a persons’ rights, the nature of the offences must be such that a harm had been inflicted upon another by the deeds of the accused, which he had clearly intended, in order to justify the harshness of the punishment. These two elements – the offensive act and the malicious intention to inflict harm – must therefore be evident. However, where the offence done had been an omission to perform a deed, then the moral question arises as to whether the absence of an act would justify the imposition of punishment. This is the crux of the debate on criminal liability attached to omissions. This study explores the nature of omissions and the reason why certain types of omissions, and not others, would be worthy of sanction. Since omissions are construed as failure to perform a duty, the types and sources of duties are also examined to gain insight into the type of harm inflicted by the omission. The study delved into the philosophical arguments and set of attributes upon which to base an assessment of whether criminal liability should be attached to omissions. ... SIONS IN CRIMINAL LAW 12 2.1 Elements of a crime 12 2.2 Definition of ‘omission’ 12 2.3 Distinguishing acts from omissions 13 2.4 Omissions as a source of liability 14 Chapter 3: SOURCES OF DUTY AS BASIS OF OMISSIONS 18 3.1 Liability for omissions under the common law 18 3.2 Statutes that impose a duty to act 19 3.3 Failure to prevent or report criminal conduct 19 3.4 Duty arising from special relationships 20 3.5 Duty to avert a danger that was created by defendant 27 3.5 Failure to provide medical treatment 28 Chapter 4: TYPES OF SOURCES OF DUTIES 33 4.1 First type: voluntary assumption of duty 33 4.2 Second type: voluntary performance of an act that incurs a duty 34 4.3 Third type: justification without voluntariness 35 Chapter 5: SPECIAL ISSUES IN OMISSIONS 38 5.1 Corporate manslaughter by omission: omissions by police officers 38 5.2 Liability for omissions in international criminal law 43 Chapter 6: ANALYSIS 45 6.1 The central debate on attaching liabilities to omi ssions 45 6.2 The Act-Omission Paradox 48 6.3 Summary 50 Chapter 7: CONCLUSION 53 Bibliography 56 Table of Cases Airedale National Health Service Trust v Bland [1993] AC 789, All ER 821 Director of Publi Prosecutions v Santa-Bermudez, EWHC 2908 [2003] (Admin). Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1969] 1 QB 439, [1968] 3 All ER 442, [ 1968] 3 WLR 1120, DC Lennard’s Carrying Co., Ltd. v Asiatic Petroleum Co., Ltd. [1915] AC 705. R v Adomako, [1994] HL R v Chattaway [1922] 17 Cr App R 7 R v Gibbins & Proctor, [1918] 13 Cr App R 134. R v Instan, [1893] 1QB 450 R v Khan, [1998] Crim LR 830 R v Lowe, [1973] QB 702 R v Stone & Dobinson, [1987] QB 354. R v Miller [1983] ] UKHL 6, 2 AC 161 R v Senior [1899] 1 QB 283 R v Yuthiwattana (1984) 80 Cr App R 55 Re B (A Minor) (Wardship: Medical Treatment)

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.