CRIMINAL LAW 2026 STUDY
MATERIAL WITH COMPREHENSIVE
PRACTICE QUESTIONS AND VERIFIED
CORRECT SOLUTIONS ALREADY
GRADED A+
What are the sources of criminal law?
• Acts of Parliament, e.g. Theft Act 1968
• Judges, e.g. Shaw v DPP (1962)
• Judicial precedent, e.g. R v R (1991)
What are actus reus and mens rea?
• Actus reus - physical element of the crime (act/omission)
• Mens rea - the mental element of the crime, intent
What is burden of proof? Standard of proof? Reverse onus?
1) The prosecution must prove that defendant is guilty
2) The extent to which the burden of proof must be made: beyond a
reasonable doubt ('99 per cent test')
3) Shifting the burden of proof to the defendant (e.g. insanity)
What if the defendant has no control over their actions? Give the case example and
what it has established.
,1) Involuntary act - the defendant has not committed the actus reus
2) R v Hill v Baxter (1958) - no real evidence of the driver being an automaton
3) Involuntary acts are losing control of the vehicle while being stung by a
swarm of bees, being struck on the head by a stone or having a heart attack
while driving
What is a state of affair? Give case example.
1) Instance in which the defendant has been convicted even though the act was
not desired by the defendant, but through actions against their will
2) R v Larsonneur (1933) - French woman, ordered to leave the UK, got
deported back. She was arrested and charged with illegal immigration
What are the 6 situations where an omission can give rise to liability in criminal
law? Give examples where possible.
• An Act of Parliament makes it an offence, e.g. Road Traffic Act 1988
• A contractual duty: R v Pittwood (1902): guilty of manslaughter because of
railway-crossing keeper's failure to close the gate
• Special relationship: R v Gibbins and Proctor (1918): the child's father and
his mistress failed to feed the child so it died -> guilty of murder
• A duty toward victim has been taken voluntarily: R v Stone and Dobinson
(1977): defendants were convicted of manslaughter as they owed a duty of
care to Stone's elderly sister
• Consequence of the accused's official position: R v Dytham (1979): the police
officer was guilty of willfully and without reasonable excuse neglecting to
perform his duty
• Defendant has set in motion a chain of events: R v Miller (1983): guilty of
arson as squatter has not attempted to put the fire out
,What is the factual causation? Give case example.
• The consequence would not have happened 'but for' the defendant's conduct
• R v Pagett (1983): pregnant woman would not have died 'but for' the
defendant using her as a shield in the shoot-out
What is considered in the legal causation?
• The thin skull rule (defendant is liable for any implications associated with
victim's special characteristics; take victim as you find them)
• The chain of causation (more than minimal contribution)
What is the 'thin skull' rule? Give case examples.
The 'thin-skull rule': the defendant must take the victim as he/she finds them;
the defendant is liable for more serious injury if the victim has something
unusual about their physical/mental state which makes them more vulnerable
R v Blaue (1975): blood transfusion was against the victim's religion; the
defendant was guilty for her death (stabbed her)
What can the chain of causation be broken by? Give cases.
1) Novus actus interveniens (an intervening act)
, 2) • Medical treatment - R v Jordan (1956): the stab wound was not the
significant cause but doctors' misconduct in antibiotics prescription
• An act of a third party - R v Rafferty (2007): the final act of drowning the
victim was new
• Victim's own act - R v Roberts (1992): the defendant was liable for the girl's
injuries as she was trying to escape from sexual advances
Who are exempted from criminal prosecution?
• Children <10
• Insane people -> will be detained in a hospital under the Mental Health Act
1983
• Involuntary acts (e.g. R v Mitchell 1983, the act of punching was
involuntary)
• Absence of the required mental state
• Self-defence
• Duress
What are the two types of intention?
• Direct - defendant decided to bring about the prohibited consequence (e.g. R
v Mohan 1975 - direct intention to scare/injure the police officer)
• Oblique/indirect - the consequences were not virtually certain (e.g. R v
Woollin 1998 - the defendant lost his temper and threw his 3-month-old son
towards his pram which was against the wall just over a metre away, the baby
died. The court ruled that the consequence must be a virtual certainty and the
defendant must realise this)
MATERIAL WITH COMPREHENSIVE
PRACTICE QUESTIONS AND VERIFIED
CORRECT SOLUTIONS ALREADY
GRADED A+
What are the sources of criminal law?
• Acts of Parliament, e.g. Theft Act 1968
• Judges, e.g. Shaw v DPP (1962)
• Judicial precedent, e.g. R v R (1991)
What are actus reus and mens rea?
• Actus reus - physical element of the crime (act/omission)
• Mens rea - the mental element of the crime, intent
What is burden of proof? Standard of proof? Reverse onus?
1) The prosecution must prove that defendant is guilty
2) The extent to which the burden of proof must be made: beyond a
reasonable doubt ('99 per cent test')
3) Shifting the burden of proof to the defendant (e.g. insanity)
What if the defendant has no control over their actions? Give the case example and
what it has established.
,1) Involuntary act - the defendant has not committed the actus reus
2) R v Hill v Baxter (1958) - no real evidence of the driver being an automaton
3) Involuntary acts are losing control of the vehicle while being stung by a
swarm of bees, being struck on the head by a stone or having a heart attack
while driving
What is a state of affair? Give case example.
1) Instance in which the defendant has been convicted even though the act was
not desired by the defendant, but through actions against their will
2) R v Larsonneur (1933) - French woman, ordered to leave the UK, got
deported back. She was arrested and charged with illegal immigration
What are the 6 situations where an omission can give rise to liability in criminal
law? Give examples where possible.
• An Act of Parliament makes it an offence, e.g. Road Traffic Act 1988
• A contractual duty: R v Pittwood (1902): guilty of manslaughter because of
railway-crossing keeper's failure to close the gate
• Special relationship: R v Gibbins and Proctor (1918): the child's father and
his mistress failed to feed the child so it died -> guilty of murder
• A duty toward victim has been taken voluntarily: R v Stone and Dobinson
(1977): defendants were convicted of manslaughter as they owed a duty of
care to Stone's elderly sister
• Consequence of the accused's official position: R v Dytham (1979): the police
officer was guilty of willfully and without reasonable excuse neglecting to
perform his duty
• Defendant has set in motion a chain of events: R v Miller (1983): guilty of
arson as squatter has not attempted to put the fire out
,What is the factual causation? Give case example.
• The consequence would not have happened 'but for' the defendant's conduct
• R v Pagett (1983): pregnant woman would not have died 'but for' the
defendant using her as a shield in the shoot-out
What is considered in the legal causation?
• The thin skull rule (defendant is liable for any implications associated with
victim's special characteristics; take victim as you find them)
• The chain of causation (more than minimal contribution)
What is the 'thin skull' rule? Give case examples.
The 'thin-skull rule': the defendant must take the victim as he/she finds them;
the defendant is liable for more serious injury if the victim has something
unusual about their physical/mental state which makes them more vulnerable
R v Blaue (1975): blood transfusion was against the victim's religion; the
defendant was guilty for her death (stabbed her)
What can the chain of causation be broken by? Give cases.
1) Novus actus interveniens (an intervening act)
, 2) • Medical treatment - R v Jordan (1956): the stab wound was not the
significant cause but doctors' misconduct in antibiotics prescription
• An act of a third party - R v Rafferty (2007): the final act of drowning the
victim was new
• Victim's own act - R v Roberts (1992): the defendant was liable for the girl's
injuries as she was trying to escape from sexual advances
Who are exempted from criminal prosecution?
• Children <10
• Insane people -> will be detained in a hospital under the Mental Health Act
1983
• Involuntary acts (e.g. R v Mitchell 1983, the act of punching was
involuntary)
• Absence of the required mental state
• Self-defence
• Duress
What are the two types of intention?
• Direct - defendant decided to bring about the prohibited consequence (e.g. R
v Mohan 1975 - direct intention to scare/injure the police officer)
• Oblique/indirect - the consequences were not virtually certain (e.g. R v
Woollin 1998 - the defendant lost his temper and threw his 3-month-old son
towards his pram which was against the wall just over a metre away, the baby
died. The court ruled that the consequence must be a virtual certainty and the
defendant must realise this)
