Involuntary Manslaughter: Gross Negligence Manslaughter
Involuntary Manslaughter: Where the defendant does not intend to kill the victim from their actions or decisions.
Gross Negligence Manslaughter R v Adomako (1994): GNM is when the defendant breaches their
duty of care to the victim in a gross way which causes the victims
death. Death must be a foreseeable result from the breach.
The Five Elements Explanation
Duty of Care Omissions:
R v Dytham (1979): A duty through one’s official position.
R v Gibbons & Proctor (1918): A duty because of a relationship.
R v Stone & Dobinson (1977): A duty which has been taken on voluntarily.
R v Pittwood (1902): A contractual duty.
R v Miller (1983): A duty which arises because the defendant has set in motion a chain of events.
Additional Cases:
> R v Adomako (1994): Doctors owing patients a duty.
> R v Wacker (2002): Even if both D and V are complicit in a crime, this does not prevent D from owing V
a duty of care, though there could be no civil liability. Confirmed in R v Willoughby (2005).
> R v Evans (2009): A duty can arise where D creates a state of affairs which he knows or ought to know
has become life threatening.
Involuntary Manslaughter: Where the defendant does not intend to kill the victim from their actions or decisions.
Gross Negligence Manslaughter R v Adomako (1994): GNM is when the defendant breaches their
duty of care to the victim in a gross way which causes the victims
death. Death must be a foreseeable result from the breach.
The Five Elements Explanation
Duty of Care Omissions:
R v Dytham (1979): A duty through one’s official position.
R v Gibbons & Proctor (1918): A duty because of a relationship.
R v Stone & Dobinson (1977): A duty which has been taken on voluntarily.
R v Pittwood (1902): A contractual duty.
R v Miller (1983): A duty which arises because the defendant has set in motion a chain of events.
Additional Cases:
> R v Adomako (1994): Doctors owing patients a duty.
> R v Wacker (2002): Even if both D and V are complicit in a crime, this does not prevent D from owing V
a duty of care, though there could be no civil liability. Confirmed in R v Willoughby (2005).
> R v Evans (2009): A duty can arise where D creates a state of affairs which he knows or ought to know
has become life threatening.
