Law, UAM

Unlawful Act Manslaughter

What could you write as the opening paragraph?

- D [name] does not have malice aforethought (intent to kill or cause GBH) and so may be guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

- Here, it is unlawful act manslaughter (UAM) in relation to…

What is the 4 key elements you must know for UAM?

1. The defendant must have committed an unlawful criminal act.

2. The defendant’s unlawful act must be dangerous on an objective test.

3. The defendant’s act must cause the death of the victim.

4. The defendant must have the mens rea for the unlawful act which caused the victim’s death.

Write a paragraph for each of them applying it to the facts of the scenario 

Talk about what, 1.An unlawful criminal act means? And give the four cases involved

- For UAM, first there must be an unlawful criminal act (Lamb)

- In Lamb there was no unlawful act because an assault was not committed

- An omission is not enough (Lowe). 

- And It cannot be a civil wrong (Franklin).

- The unlawful act doesn’t have to be aimed at the victim (Goodfellow)

When writing  in the exam, you are given an illegal act like assault, you need to the say the actus reus of this crime and how the D has fulfilled this. State Lamb, but the other three might not be necessary but do it anyways 

 what does, 2. the unlawful act must be dangerous mean? What is the test?

- In Church the court outlined the test for dangerousness which was that the act must be such as, 

-‘all sober and reasonable people would inevitably recognise must subject the other person to the risk of some physical harm, albeit not serious harm.” 

- D does not need to have foreseen that some harm will occur from his action (DPP v Newbury and Jones).

- The Court will consider what facts were apparent to D when deciding if the act was dangerous (Dawson) e.g. if the V is particularly frail then an act may be more ‘dangerous’ than if they are apparently young and healthy (Watson)

In the exam you would write this like,  In this case there was a dangerous act because…A reasonable person would realise that [insert D’s act] could cause some harm, albeit not serious harm

- Albeit means even through, so even though if it wasn't serious harm it is still harm

What does 3. the unlawful act must of caused the death mean? What needs to be done in this paragraph?

- The unlawful act must cause death. This means factual and legal causation must be proven (go straight into application)

- apply but for test (White/Pagett)

- Legal causation: apply ‘significant contribution’/’operating and substantial’ cause test (Pagett/Smith) 

- Apply any relevant intervening acts before concluding on legal causation: 

     Medical treatment (Smith/Cheshire/Jordan) 

     V’s own acts (including running away/escape) (Roberts) 

     Thin skull rule (Blaue)

What does 4. the defendant must have the mens rea for the original unlawful act mean? 

- The defendant need only have the mens rea for the original unlawful act, and need not intend or have foreseen the risk of death. In Lamb, D also did not have the MR for assault.

- [In some cases the mens rea may be transferred from the intended victim to the actual victim (Latimer/Mitchell)] – only mention if relevant] (transferred malice) 

In the exam you will write,  Here, the original unlawful act was… [e.g. assault, battery etc…].  The mens rea of this crime therefore is….. Here, D has the MR as ……[Apply direct intention (Mohan) or recklessness (Cunningham)] 

What should you write as a conclusion? 

As all the elements of UAM are satisfied D would be found guilty and sentenced at the discretion of the judge up to a maximum of life imprisonment. 

Write something like that applying to the scenario 

After writing conclusion discuss any relevant defences