Law 4 Theft

1041 Words5 Pages
LAW 4 Homework Alex Sharkov 8.05.2013 Q: Discuss the meaning of fault as a basis for criminal and/or civil liability. Explain and evaluate the imposition of liability without fault. (Jun 10) 1. Intro 2. Criminal law 3. Actus Reus 4. Non-fatal offences (ABH, GBH) 5. Theft (Make an example) 6. Mens rea (Intention, recklessness) 7. Civil law 8. Negligence (Donoghue) 9. 3 part test (Caparo) 10. Problems with fault 11.Strict liability (Criminal & Civil law) 12. Conclusion Fault is a simple way of describing legal blame and responsibility. There are many positive and negative sides whether criminal and civil law liability should be based on fault, as the final sentences made by judges can be as satisfying, as absurd as well. So, for a criminal liability the most essential element to be proved is an Actus Reus, which can reflect the highest and the lowest levels of blame. As the actus reus is a physical element of crime, it can be done voluntarily (Hill v Baxter) or Involuntary, it can also be an omission, where the normal rule is that an omission cannot make a person guilty of an offence. The highest level of fault is a murder, because it the most serious offence. On the second place by seriousness of offence is Non-Fatal offences and then goes theft. It is important to point that in Non-Fatal offences if defendant had a battery, he would have a low level of blame, however if the victim would had some or serious injuries, then the defendant would be liable for ABH s47 or GBH s18, therefore these offences will have different levels of fault. Also, theft can have different levels of fault as well, for example there are 2 defendants, and one of them is charged for a robbery offence under s8 Theft Act 1968, for a stealing of wallet (Dawson & James 1976). The other defendant is charged for theft under s1 Theft Act 1968, for a switching price labels (Morris 1983). Therefore

More about Law 4 Theft

Open Document