GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW
MODULE CODE : CRW2601
INSTITUTION: UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA
EXAM FORMAT: MULTIPLE CHOICE ( QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS)
DATE : 13 OCTOBER 2021 RECENT EXAMINATION
THIS EXAM PACK CONTAINS ELABORATED ANSWERS TO THE RECENT OCTOBER EXAMINATION
WRITTEN BY UNISA LAW STUDENTS. IT WILL ASSIST THOSE WHO HAD TO AEGROTATE THEIR EXAM
OR ARE GOING TO WRITE SUPPLEMENTARY EXAMINATION IN JANUARY/ FEBRUARY.
CALL SILAS ON : 072 439 6681 OR 079 580 3018( ALSO WHATSSAP ON SAME CONTACT
DETAILS)
EMAIL:
, Legal studies excellence
1. The investigation into the presence of the four requirements of criminal liability must follow
a certain sequence as follows:
a. The culpability requirement, the unlawfulness requirement, compliance with the
definitional requirement and the requirement of an act
b. The requirement of an act, compliance with the definitional elements, the unlawfulness
requirement and the culpability requirement
, c. The unlawfulness requirement, the requirement of an act, and compliance with the
definitional requirements
d. The requirement of an act, the unlawfulness requirement, the culpability requirement
and compliance with the definitional requirement
Briefly, the following are sequential four general requirements for a criminal liability
(1) conduct
(2) that complies with the definitional elements of the crime
(3) and that is unlawful
(4) and culpable( culpability)
2. The determination of X’s true state of mind and the perception of whether there really was a
mistake that excludes intention is a question of fact and is based on the following test
a. A subjective test
b. An objective test
c. The reasonable person test
d. The reasonable man test
Whether there really was a mistake that excludes intention is a question
of fact. What must be determined is X’s true state of mind and conception
of the relevant events and circumstances. The question is not whether a
reasonable person in X’s position would have made a mistake. The test in
respect of intention is subjective, and if we were to compare X’s state of mind
and view of the circumstances with those of a reasonable person in the same
circumstances, we would be applying an objective test in respect of intention,
which is not warranted.
3. According to the theory of adequate causation, the problem of causation is resolved by
finding a causal link based on generalisation which may be made by
a. An ordinary person
b. By a legally-qualified person
c. An academically-qualified person
d. A reasonable person
Because of the vagueness and ineffectiveness of the individualisation theories,
many writers have refused to attempt to solve problems of legal causation by
looking for the decisive, most effective or proximate condition. Instead, they
have preferred to base a causal relationship on generalisations that may be
MODULE CODE : CRW2601
INSTITUTION: UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA
EXAM FORMAT: MULTIPLE CHOICE ( QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS)
DATE : 13 OCTOBER 2021 RECENT EXAMINATION
THIS EXAM PACK CONTAINS ELABORATED ANSWERS TO THE RECENT OCTOBER EXAMINATION
WRITTEN BY UNISA LAW STUDENTS. IT WILL ASSIST THOSE WHO HAD TO AEGROTATE THEIR EXAM
OR ARE GOING TO WRITE SUPPLEMENTARY EXAMINATION IN JANUARY/ FEBRUARY.
CALL SILAS ON : 072 439 6681 OR 079 580 3018( ALSO WHATSSAP ON SAME CONTACT
DETAILS)
EMAIL:
, Legal studies excellence
1. The investigation into the presence of the four requirements of criminal liability must follow
a certain sequence as follows:
a. The culpability requirement, the unlawfulness requirement, compliance with the
definitional requirement and the requirement of an act
b. The requirement of an act, compliance with the definitional elements, the unlawfulness
requirement and the culpability requirement
, c. The unlawfulness requirement, the requirement of an act, and compliance with the
definitional requirements
d. The requirement of an act, the unlawfulness requirement, the culpability requirement
and compliance with the definitional requirement
Briefly, the following are sequential four general requirements for a criminal liability
(1) conduct
(2) that complies with the definitional elements of the crime
(3) and that is unlawful
(4) and culpable( culpability)
2. The determination of X’s true state of mind and the perception of whether there really was a
mistake that excludes intention is a question of fact and is based on the following test
a. A subjective test
b. An objective test
c. The reasonable person test
d. The reasonable man test
Whether there really was a mistake that excludes intention is a question
of fact. What must be determined is X’s true state of mind and conception
of the relevant events and circumstances. The question is not whether a
reasonable person in X’s position would have made a mistake. The test in
respect of intention is subjective, and if we were to compare X’s state of mind
and view of the circumstances with those of a reasonable person in the same
circumstances, we would be applying an objective test in respect of intention,
which is not warranted.
3. According to the theory of adequate causation, the problem of causation is resolved by
finding a causal link based on generalisation which may be made by
a. An ordinary person
b. By a legally-qualified person
c. An academically-qualified person
d. A reasonable person
Because of the vagueness and ineffectiveness of the individualisation theories,
many writers have refused to attempt to solve problems of legal causation by
looking for the decisive, most effective or proximate condition. Instead, they
have preferred to base a causal relationship on generalisations that may be
