|
Common Purpose
The doctrine of common purpose, common design, joint enterprise, joint criminal enterprise or parasitic accessory liability is a common law legal doctrine that imputes criminal liability to the participants in a criminal enterprise for all reasonable results from that enterprise. The common purpose doctrine was established in English law, and later adopted in other common-law jurisdictions including Scotland, Ireland, Australia, Trinidad and Tobago, the Solomon Islands, Texas, the International Criminal Court, and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. Common design also applies in the law of tort. It is a different legal test from that which applies in the criminal law. The difference between common designs in the criminal law and the civil law was illustrated in ''NCB v Gamble'' 9591 QB 11 at 23, by Devlin LJ: The difference applies in US law as well. The United States Supreme Court reached the same conclusion in ''Sony Corporation of America v Un ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Common Law
Common law (also known as judicial precedent, judge-made law, or case law) is the body of law primarily developed through judicial decisions rather than statutes. Although common law may incorporate certain statutes, it is largely based on precedent—judicial rulings made in previous similar cases. The presiding judge determines which precedents to apply in deciding each new case. Common law is deeply rooted in Precedent, ''stare decisis'' ("to stand by things decided"), where courts follow precedents established by previous decisions. When a similar case has been resolved, courts typically align their reasoning with the precedent set in that decision. However, in a "case of first impression" with no precedent or clear legislative guidance, judges are empowered to resolve the issue and establish new precedent. The common law, so named because it was common to all the king's courts across England, originated in the practices of the courts of the English kings in the centuries fo ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Judicial Committee Of The Privy Council
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) is the highest court of appeal for the Crown Dependencies, the British Overseas Territories, some Commonwealth countries and a few institutions in the United Kingdom. Established on 14 August 1833 to hear appeals formerly heard by the King-in-Council, the Privy Council formerly acted as the court of last resort for the entire British Empire, except for the United Kingdom itself.P. A. Howell, ''The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, 1833–1876: Its Origins, Structure, and Development'', Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1979 Formally a statutory committee of His Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council, the Judicial Committee consists of senior judges who are Privy Councillors; they are predominantly justices of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom and senior judges from the Commonwealth of Nations. Although it is often simply referred to as the "Privy Council", the Judicial Committee is only one constitu ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
R V Gnango
''Regina v Armel Gnango'' is the leading English criminal law case on the interaction of joint enterprise, transferred malice, and exemption from criminal liability where a party to what would normally be a crime is the victim of it. The Supreme Court held, restoring Gnango's conviction for the murder of Magda Pniewska, that he was guilty of murder notwithstanding the fact that he had not fired the shot which killed Pniewska during the shoot out which led to her death, and that the fatal shot had been fired by his opponent in an attempt to kill him. The judgment of the Supreme Court has been criticised over the alleged extent to which it was designed to mollify public opinion, and in the context of debates over the nature of the doctrine of joint enterprise. Background At approximately 6.20 pm on 2 October 2007 a 26-year-old Polish care worker, Magda Pniewska, was making her way home from her place of work at Manley Court, a care home run by Bupa in New Cross in southeast L ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Criminal Damage Act 1971
Property damage, Criminal damage is a crime in English law. Originally a common law offence, today it is defined for England and Wales by the Criminal Damage Act 1971, which creates several offences protecting property rights. The act provides a comprehensive structure covering merely preparatory acts to the most serious offences of arson and causing damage with intent to endanger life. As such, punishments vary from a fixed penalty notice, fixed penalty to life imprisonment, and the court may order payment of compensation to a victim. The common law offence was largely concerned with the protection of dwellings and the food supply, and few sanctions were imposed for damaging personal property. Liability was originally restricted to the payment of damages by way of compensation. As time passed, specific laws were introduced to deal with particular situations as they were judged to require intervention, most particularly alongside the rise of mechanisation and urbanisation during ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Police Constable
A constable is a person holding a particular office, most commonly in law enforcement. The office of constable can vary significantly in different jurisdictions. ''Constable'' is commonly the rank of an police officer, officer within a police service. Other people may be granted powers of a constable without holding this title. Etymology Etymologically, the word ''constable'' is a loan from Old French ''conestable'' (Modern French ''connétable''),p. 93b-283a, T. F. Hoad, ''The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology'' (Oxford University Press, 1993) itself from Late Latin ''comes stabuli'' (comes, attendant to the stables, literally 'count of the stable'), and originated from the Roman Empire; originally, the constable was the officer responsible for keeping the horses of a lord or monarch.p103, Bruce, Alistair, ''Keepers of the Kingdom'' (Cassell, 2002), [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Rayner Goddard, Baron Goddard
William Edgar Rayner Goddard, Baron Goddard, (10 April 1877 – 29 May 1971) was Lord Chief Justice of England from 1946 to 1958, known for his strict sentencing and mostly conservative views despite being the first Lord Chief Justice to be appointed by a Labour government, as well as the first to possess a law degree. Goddard's no-nonsense reputation was reflected in a number of nicknames that he acquired, which included: 'The Tiger', 'Justice-in-a-jiffy', and—from Winston Churchill—'Lord God-damn'. He is considered one of the last hanging judges. Early life and career William Edgar Rayner Goddard was born on 10 April 1877 at Bassett Road, Notting Hill, London, the second of three sons and the third of five children of the solicitor Charles Goddard (22 February 1843 – 27 May 1922) and his wife Janet née Jobson, who was from Sheffield (1851 – 8 June 1934). He went by his third name Rayner throughout his life. Goddard attended Marlborough College, where he decided o ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Derek Bentley Case
Derek William Bentley (30 June 1933 – 28 January 1953) was a British man who was hanged for the murder of a policeman during a burglary. Christopher Craig, then aged 16, a friend and accomplice of Bentley, was accused of the murder. Bentley was convicted as a party to the crime under the English law principle of joint enterprise, as the burglary had been committed in mutual understanding and bringing deadly weapons. The outcome of the trial, and Home Secretary David Maxwell Fyfe's failure to grant clemency to Bentley, were highly controversial. The jury at the trial found Bentley guilty based in large part on the prosecution's interpretation of the ambiguous phrase "Let him have it", Bentley's alleged exhortation to Craig, which prosecutors argued was an order to shoot and defence counsel argued was an order to surrender; this after Lord Chief Justice Goddard had described Bentley as "mentally aiding" the murder. Goddard sentenced Bentley to be hanged, despite a rec ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Mens Rea
In criminal law, (; Law Latin for "guilty mind") is the mental state of a defendant who is accused of committing a crime. In common law jurisdictions, most crimes require proof both of ''mens rea'' and '' actus reus'' ("guilty act") before the defendant can be found guilty. Introduction The standard common law test of criminal liability is expressed in the Latin phrase ,1 Subst. Crim. L. § 5.1(a) (3d ed.) i.e. "the act is not culpable unless the mind is guilty". As a general rule, someone who acted without mental fault is not liable in criminal law.". . . a person is not guilty of an offense unless he acted purposely, knowingly, recklessly or negligently, as the law may require, with respect to each material element of the offense." Model Penal Code § 2.02(1) Exceptions are known as strict liability crimes.21 Am. Jur. 2d Criminal Law § 127 Moreover, when a person intends a harm, but as a result of bad aim or other cause the intent is transferred from an intended victi ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Manslaughter In English Law
In the English law of homicide, manslaughter is a less serious offence than murder, the differential being between levels of fault based on the ''mens rea'' (Latin for "guilty mind") or by reason of a partial defence. In England and Wales, a common practice is to prefer a charge of murder, with the judge or defence able to introduce manslaughter as an option (see alternative verdict). The jury then decides whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty of either murder or manslaughter. On conviction for manslaughter, sentencing is at the judge's discretion, whereas a sentence of life imprisonment is mandatory on conviction for murder. Manslaughter may be either ''voluntary'' or ''involuntary'', depending on whether the accused has the required ''mens rea'' for murder. Voluntary manslaughter '' Voluntary manslaughter'' occurs when the defendant kills with ''mens rea'' (an intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm), but one of those partial defences which reduce murder to m ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Murder In English Law
Murder is an offence under the common law legal system of England and Wales. It is considered the most serious form of homicide, in which one person kills another with the intention to unlawfully cause either death or serious injury. The element of intentionality was originally termed malice aforethought, although it required neither malice nor premeditation. Baker states that many killings done with a high degree of subjective recklessness were treated as murder from the 12th century right through until the 1974 decision in ''DPP v Hyam''. Because murder is generally defined in law as an intent to cause serious harm or injury (alone or with others), combined with a death arising from that intention, there are certain circumstances where a death will be treated as murder even if the defendant did not wish to kill the actual victim. This is called " transferred malice", and arises in two common cases: * The defendant intended serious harm to one or more persons, but an unintended ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Novus Actus Interveniens
Breaking the chain (or ''novus actus interveniens'', literally ''new intervening act'') refers in English law to the idea that causal connections are deemed to finish. Even if the defendant can be shown to have acted negligently, there will be no liability if some new intervening act breaks the chain of causation between that negligence and the loss or damage sustained by the claimant. Discussion Where there is only a single operative cause for the loss and damage suffered by the claimant, it is a relatively simple matter to determine whether that cause was a breach of the duty of care owed to the claimant by the defendant. But where the sequence of events leading to the loss and damage comprises more than one cause, the process of separating and attributing potential or actual liability is more complicated. Act of God and other natural events as contributing causes Where there are several potential causes of harm, some of which are tortious and some of which are natural, th ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Imputation (law)
In law, the principle of imputation or attribution underpins the concept that — ignorance of the law does not excuse. All laws are published and available for study in all developed states. The said imputation might also be termed "fair notice". The content of the law is imputed to all persons who are within the jurisdiction, no matter how transiently. This fiction tries to negate the unfairness of someone avoiding liability for an act or omission by simply denying knowledge of the law. The principle also arises in specific areas of law, such as criminal law and commercial law, to describe the need for the law to hold a person liable, even when they may not have known the particular circumstances that caused another person to sustain loss or damage. Criminal law Corporate liability To incur liability for a crime, a person must have both committed a prohibited act (the ''actus reus'', which must be willed: see automatism) and have had an appropriate mental element (the '' ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
