The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

law question

If someone fails to follow a coroner's report which says this building is prone to fires. Then a fire happens in that vulnerable building and people die is he liable for gross negligence manslaughter. FOR MOOT lol
Beautiful thing about gross negligence manslaughter is it's a catch-all. You were so negligent as to be criminal. Question for the jury; some will buy it and some won't.
Original post by Notoriety
Beautiful thing about gross negligence manslaughter is it's a catch-all. You were so negligent as to be criminal. Question for the jury; some will buy it and some won't.

Hmmm, i guess the egg shell skull rule would come into play which would not break the chain of causation. The building being vulnerable to catching fire, the man fails to follow up on the coroner's recomendations, the building does catch fire and people die in it thus he is liable. Idk thats how i would construe it.
Original post by Inquisitor1236
Hmmm, i guess the egg shell skull rule would come into play which would not break the chain of causation. The building being vulnerable to catching fire, the man fails to follow up on the coroner's recomendations, the building does catch fire and people die in it thus he is liable. Idk thats how i would construe it.

You've misunderstood the eggshell skull rule. It wouldn't apply to the building in this situation. The vulnerability of the building is not a matter for causation here; it's the owner's state of knowledge as to the vulnerability that's relevant. If the building catches fire and he couldn't possibly have known it was vulnerable to fire, he will of course (possibly legitimately) argue that that's a long way from gross negligence manslaughter. If, however, he is put on clear notice by the finding of a coroner that the building is vulnerable to fire, one would expect him to take steps to ensure that those vulnerabilities were addressed. If he doesn't, or the steps he takes are not sufficient, that feeds in to the the issue of whether there was gross negligence.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you