Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Martin 1881 - what was the outcome, what was it held that inflict and cause meant? Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I have in my notes that Martin 1881 held that inflict and cause meant the same thing and there was not requirement of directness or application of force.

    however for my a2 exam (this weeeek!?!?) I have read in the source booklet...

    On the facts or Martin the accused would be guilty of the more serious offence but not the lesser offence..... the result is absurd. It could have been avoided by having the same verb in S.18 and S.20.

    Surely if Martin had held they were the same then this makes no sense!?

    PLEASE help!!! x
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    http://www.oup.com/uk/orc/bin/978019...al_cm_ch04.pdf

    Page 90....
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by methyl benzene)
    http://www.oup.com/uk/orc/bin/978019...al_cm_ch04.pdf

    Page 90....
    Page 90? :s it's not mentioned on 90!? Page 75 says:

    Wills J there also referred to R v Martin (1881) 8 QBD 54, saying:
    The prisoner in that case did what was certain to make people crush one another perhaps to death, and the grievous bodily harm was as truly inflicted by him as if he had hurled a stone at somebody’s head.
    In the same way a defendant who pours a dangerous substance into a machine just as truly
    assaults the next user of the machine as if he had himself switched the machine on.



    Does this mean they mean the same?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Yes
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by irish_4_life)
    Page 90? :s it's not mentioned on 90!? Page 75 says:

    Wills J there also referred to R v Martin (1881) 8 QBD 54, saying:
    The prisoner in that case did what was certain to make people crush one another perhaps to death, and the grievous bodily harm was as truly inflicted by him as if he had hurled a stone at somebody’s head.
    In the same way a defendant who pours a dangerous substance into a machine just as truly
    assaults the next user of the machine as if he had himself switched the machine on.



    Does this mean they mean the same?
    Read page 91.That'll give you some idea
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up sugar, or salt?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.