Criminal Law
This assignment will critically examine the extent to which the law imposes criminal
liability for omissions to act in this assignment. I will also consider whether the laws
and concepts governing criminal responsibility for omissions are sufficiently limiting
of individual liberty.
To begin, when a person commits a criminal act, they are held criminally liable. Only
when the act is done voluntarily it is deemed a criminal offence. To be held liable for
an offence, the defendant's external conduct must meet the offence's conditions,
which include the actus reus and mens rea components.
Every crime will involve two parties; the ‘victim’ of the offence and the ‘defendant’
who stands accused in court. So, when an offence is committed, it will consist of two
elements, both of which are required for the offence to be found. ‘Actus Reus 1’ (“AR”)
(which is Latin for ‘guilty act’), describes the defendants actual physical act(s) which
forms the objective elements of the crime. Whereas ‘Mens Rea 2’ (“MR”) (which is
Latin for ‘guilty mind’), describes the required mental state of the defendant at the
time at which the AR occurred. Although the Criminal Justice System does recognise
offences that can be committed without a guilty mindset, they are the exception
rather than the rule and are rarely serious.
Every crime has a set of components that make up its actus reus, as defined by the
common law or the statute that defines the offence 3. The term 'actus reus’ can be
defined as an act along with two additional factors. The first is any consequences of
that behaviour as defined by that term, and the second is any surrounding conditions
as defined by that definition (other than references to the mens rea or element of
negligence on the part of the defendant, or to any defence 4).
1
Elawresourcescom, 'Actus reus in criminal law' (E-lawresources, 2021)
<http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/Actus-reus.php> accessed 1 January 2022
2
Practical law, 'Mens Rea' (Practicallawcom, 2021)
<https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/w-002-9006?
transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true> accessed 1 January 2022
3
LexisNexis.com, '(ii) Actus Reus 6 The actus reus' (LexisNexis, 2021)
<https://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=616R-H963-GXFD-840Y-
0000000&csi=274661&utm_source=library_da_mkt&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=6.+The+actus+reus.
&secondRedirectIndicator=true>accessed 1 January 2022
4
Criminal Law (Volume 25 (2020), paras 1-552; Volume 26 (2020), paras 553-1014
, Criminal Law
Most significant crimes include a mental component, the type of which will vary
depending on the crime's classification 5, this is known as mens rea. 'Direct
intent' and 'indirect intent' are both expressions that denote the need for a mental
element. Each expression's meaning must be determined in the context in which it
appears, and the same expression might have multiple meanings in different
situations. Although it has been said that assigning a specific meaning to the phrase
mens rea is impossible, ideas like intent, recklessness, and knowledge are widely
employed as the basis of criminal liability and may be fundamental to it in some
ways6.
Omissions7 are common in criminal conduct. Positive acts, on the other hand,
generally require the defendant to do anything. Although, non-acting omissions are
rarely prosecuted. However, three factors must be demonstrated to determine
whether a crime was committed by omission. First, there must be a duty of care,
followed by a breach of that duty, and finally, there must be a causal link between
the breach of duty and the injury suffered. The breach of duty will not occur if the
defendants conduct was justified or if the duty was impossible. The general rule,
which was established in the case of ‘R v Smith (1959) 8’, is as follows: 'there is no
duty to act to prevent harm'. This principle states that a person cannot be held
accountable for a failure to act that results in a criminal outcome. In this case it was
held that the stab wound was an operating cause of the victim’s death, so it did not
matter that it was not the sole cause, even though there was a negligence of those
treating him. So, in order to break the chain of causation, an event must be …
unwarrantable, a new cause which disturbs the sequence of events [and] can be
described as either unreasonable or extraneous or extrinsic 9” (p. 43).
Although, there are four exceptions to this rule. The first exemption is where the
defendant has a statutory obligation to act or is a public offender with a duty to act.
5
Lexisnexiscom, '(iii)Fault Element 14 Mens rea in general' (Lexis Nexis, 2021)
<https://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=616R-H963-GXFD-8417-00000-
00&csi=274661&utm_source=library_da_mkt&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=14.+Mens+rea+in+general.
&secondRedirectIndicator=true>accessed 1 January 2022
6
Criminal Law (Volume 25 (2020), paras 1-552; Volume 26 (2020), paras 553-1014)
7
Dpp-lawcom, 'What is an omission and how can it come up in a legal claim?' (DPP Law, 2021)
<https://www.dpp-law.com/blog/what-is-an-omission/> accessed 1 January 2022
8
R v Smith (1959) 2 QB 35
9
R v Smith (1959) 2 QB 35
This assignment will critically examine the extent to which the law imposes criminal
liability for omissions to act in this assignment. I will also consider whether the laws
and concepts governing criminal responsibility for omissions are sufficiently limiting
of individual liberty.
To begin, when a person commits a criminal act, they are held criminally liable. Only
when the act is done voluntarily it is deemed a criminal offence. To be held liable for
an offence, the defendant's external conduct must meet the offence's conditions,
which include the actus reus and mens rea components.
Every crime will involve two parties; the ‘victim’ of the offence and the ‘defendant’
who stands accused in court. So, when an offence is committed, it will consist of two
elements, both of which are required for the offence to be found. ‘Actus Reus 1’ (“AR”)
(which is Latin for ‘guilty act’), describes the defendants actual physical act(s) which
forms the objective elements of the crime. Whereas ‘Mens Rea 2’ (“MR”) (which is
Latin for ‘guilty mind’), describes the required mental state of the defendant at the
time at which the AR occurred. Although the Criminal Justice System does recognise
offences that can be committed without a guilty mindset, they are the exception
rather than the rule and are rarely serious.
Every crime has a set of components that make up its actus reus, as defined by the
common law or the statute that defines the offence 3. The term 'actus reus’ can be
defined as an act along with two additional factors. The first is any consequences of
that behaviour as defined by that term, and the second is any surrounding conditions
as defined by that definition (other than references to the mens rea or element of
negligence on the part of the defendant, or to any defence 4).
1
Elawresourcescom, 'Actus reus in criminal law' (E-lawresources, 2021)
<http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/Actus-reus.php> accessed 1 January 2022
2
Practical law, 'Mens Rea' (Practicallawcom, 2021)
<https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/w-002-9006?
transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true> accessed 1 January 2022
3
LexisNexis.com, '(ii) Actus Reus 6 The actus reus' (LexisNexis, 2021)
<https://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=616R-H963-GXFD-840Y-
0000000&csi=274661&utm_source=library_da_mkt&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=6.+The+actus+reus.
&secondRedirectIndicator=true>accessed 1 January 2022
4
Criminal Law (Volume 25 (2020), paras 1-552; Volume 26 (2020), paras 553-1014
, Criminal Law
Most significant crimes include a mental component, the type of which will vary
depending on the crime's classification 5, this is known as mens rea. 'Direct
intent' and 'indirect intent' are both expressions that denote the need for a mental
element. Each expression's meaning must be determined in the context in which it
appears, and the same expression might have multiple meanings in different
situations. Although it has been said that assigning a specific meaning to the phrase
mens rea is impossible, ideas like intent, recklessness, and knowledge are widely
employed as the basis of criminal liability and may be fundamental to it in some
ways6.
Omissions7 are common in criminal conduct. Positive acts, on the other hand,
generally require the defendant to do anything. Although, non-acting omissions are
rarely prosecuted. However, three factors must be demonstrated to determine
whether a crime was committed by omission. First, there must be a duty of care,
followed by a breach of that duty, and finally, there must be a causal link between
the breach of duty and the injury suffered. The breach of duty will not occur if the
defendants conduct was justified or if the duty was impossible. The general rule,
which was established in the case of ‘R v Smith (1959) 8’, is as follows: 'there is no
duty to act to prevent harm'. This principle states that a person cannot be held
accountable for a failure to act that results in a criminal outcome. In this case it was
held that the stab wound was an operating cause of the victim’s death, so it did not
matter that it was not the sole cause, even though there was a negligence of those
treating him. So, in order to break the chain of causation, an event must be …
unwarrantable, a new cause which disturbs the sequence of events [and] can be
described as either unreasonable or extraneous or extrinsic 9” (p. 43).
Although, there are four exceptions to this rule. The first exemption is where the
defendant has a statutory obligation to act or is a public offender with a duty to act.
5
Lexisnexiscom, '(iii)Fault Element 14 Mens rea in general' (Lexis Nexis, 2021)
<https://www.lexisnexis.com/uk/legal/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=616R-H963-GXFD-8417-00000-
00&csi=274661&utm_source=library_da_mkt&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=14.+Mens+rea+in+general.
&secondRedirectIndicator=true>accessed 1 January 2022
6
Criminal Law (Volume 25 (2020), paras 1-552; Volume 26 (2020), paras 553-1014)
7
Dpp-lawcom, 'What is an omission and how can it come up in a legal claim?' (DPP Law, 2021)
<https://www.dpp-law.com/blog/what-is-an-omission/> accessed 1 January 2022
8
R v Smith (1959) 2 QB 35
9
R v Smith (1959) 2 QB 35
