Logged out
Access All our Essays in an Instant
Swap your work for FREE access, or pay £4.99 for instant access
'In general, the criminal law prohibits the doing of harm but does not impose criminal liability for an omission to act' - Assess the truth of this statement and the arguments used to justify it.
Member rating: No Rating | Words: | Submitted: Wed Jan 14 2004
Page Preview
On the left is an image preview of every page of this document, and below are the first 150 words with formatting removed:
'In general, the criminal law prohibits the doing of harm but does not impose criminal liability for an omission to act'. Assess the truth of this statement and the arguments used to justify it. In English Law a person will not normally be found criminally liable merely because he failed to act. Lord Justice Stephen stated, "It is not a crime to cause death or bodily injury, even intentionally, by any omission." He then described the situation where a man sees another man drowning but does nothing to help him, even though by simply reaching out his hand would have saved the drowning man. Under English Law the person failing to act has committed no crime. However there are limited exceptions to this rule, where it has been decided that a person should be criminally liable for an omission to act. The first of these is where a statute provides for this. A small number...
Get instant access
- Instant, unlimited access to our documents in full
- Swap your work for free access, or pay £4.99
- To see the full version of this document and 146,970 others
Receive email updates for this category
- Simply tell us your email address and receive a weekly Study Help Email for FREE
- Receive 3 FREE essay views with each email
- Get all the latest essays from Coursework.Info & discussion from TheStudentRoom.co.uk
