epicbrodem
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 8 years ago
#1
Hi guys.

Basically, we did a benchmark at college a while ago and i got a blooming awful grade. Im currently covering Unit 3 AQA law and am so baffled as to how to get the most marks in the exam! 30 minutes just doesnt seem to be enough time to pick the scenario apart and apply everything thoroughly and properly. If any top A level law students could tell me a pick apart method to use like PEEL (for thing like history etc) their teachers recommend could you tell me it and help me out? My teacher has a very unique, but ****, way of teaching us things.

No one in my class got a very good grade, heres the scenario we got:

''Leon and his friend, Phil, often tested each other out by having informal wrestling matches. However, Phil was always a little worried about these matches, because Leon could easily become excessively violent. During one such match, Leon suddenly succeeded in hurling Phil across the room, causing him to strike his head heavily against a wall. Feeling rather sick, Phil found his way home where he spent the next two days in bed before finally going to the Accident and Emergence department of his local hospital. There, he was examined by sally, an overworked doctor. After a brief examination, she concluded that he had only trivial injuries and sent him away with painkillers. In fact, he had suffered major injuries to his skull and brain, and he died the next day. ''

05. Discuss the possible liability of Leon and of Sally for the involuntary manslaughter of Phil [disregard any possible defence of consent]. (25 Marks)

Thanks guys
0
reply
epicbrodem
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#2
Report Thread starter 8 years ago
#2
bump
0
reply
Jayloo
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#3
Report 8 years ago
#3
I'm doing A2 law aswell and I agree, there's so much to cover in a lot of the scenarios that it seems impossible in the time. I got an A last year and came out of each exam only just finishing and with a hand that was very achey! Let me know if you pick up any tips - I'm struggling this year.
0
reply
Mreyow
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#4
Report 8 years ago
#4
One student in the year above me got 95/100 so I have faith in how our teacher told us to lay it out. I actually done this scenario as a practice question and I got 18/25 which isn't amazing but I did run out of time. There isn't a set way to lay it out, just in a logical, coherent manner which includes the relevant info, this is how I set mine out:

Leon may have committed an offense of unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter.

The death of the victim and the unlawful and dangerous act forms the actus reus of this offence. The act must be unlawful (Larkin), in this scenario the unlawful act could be S20 or S18 under the OAPA 1861, both of which carry the same actus reus which is wounding or GBH. GBH is defined as 'really serious bodily harm' in DPP v Smith. Therefore, 'major injuries' to the skull and brain constitute to really serious harm. The act must also be dangerous on an objective standard, as cited in Church; "all sober and reasonable people would inevitably recognise the risk...of some harm", therefore it is necessary for any reasonable person to recognise that the act would result in some harm. It is clearly evident that 'hurling' a man across the room without any safety precautions will result in some harm, as evidenced when he struck his head heavily against the wall, fulfilling the requirement for the actus reus of UADA manslaughter
1
reply
MissLinC
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#5
Report 8 years ago
#5
Not quite sure, but I believe this relates to general Duty (Foreseeability, Proximity and Reasonableness) Breach and Damage and Medical Negligence. I would have mentioned the defence of consent because of sports related activities but just say this was outside of the rules of the activity?
0
reply
MissLinC
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#6
Report 8 years ago
#6
Oh yes, Mreyow is right, it's Involuntary Manslaughter (as stated) lol.
0
reply
Mreyow
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#7
Report 8 years ago
#7
(Original post by MissLinC)
Oh yes, Mreyow is right, it's Involuntary Manslaughter (as stated) lol.
He could 'consent' to rough horseplay but it is by no means a defence to the resulting injuries suffered therefore he would not be successful in using the defence as it is ONLY available for lesser injuries
0
reply
Stephaniecamille
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#8
Report 5 years ago
#8
The way to structure this question is:
Talk about unlawful act manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter and then mention causation.

1)unlawful act: Franklin(1883), lamb(1967) d and his friend fooling around with a revolver but v had no fear so no harm was done. But in the scenario Phil said he was always worried about these wrestling matches meaning than he had fear.
2) dangerous act: mention church(1966) and the objective test. Mention Larin (1943) to illustrate reasonable person. Then state that you will discuss causation at the end of the essay.
3) mens rea for unlawful act: use newburg and Jones (1976) when D need not foresee the death to be guilty of the offence.

4) gross negligence manslaughter in Sally's case: use adomako (1994) elements.
Talk about duty of care Donaghue and Stevenson but don't use tort facts as they are not applicable in criminal law!! Use wacker(2002) to illustrate the concept of duty of care. And mention that Sally has a duty towards Phil because she is his doctor.

6) use Bateman to explain how gross an act has to be and the fact that because dally is a medic she should have realised the risk of death.

7) causation: factual causation the "but for" test, use white(1910) to illustrate..
Legal causation the "de minimis" rule.. Use Kimsey(1996) to explain what it means. Then say that Leon would be liable unless Sally's conduct amounted to a break in causation.

8) medical professions: use cases like smith(1959), Cheshire (1991) and Jordan (1956) and then conclude that Leon will be liable if Sally's conduct is applied to Smith and Cheshire's case which seems likely in these circumstances.

The question CLEARLY asks you not to use the defence of consent so do not use it!!
I'm guessing you know most of these cases so if you structure it like this then you will get full marks in the exam.
0
reply
ellsxxx
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#9
Report 5 years ago
#9
(Original post by Stephaniecamille)
The way to structure this question is:
Talk about unlawful act manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter and then mention causation.

1)unlawful act: Franklin(1883), lamb(1967) d and his friend fooling around with a revolver but v had no fear so no harm was done. But in the scenario Phil said he was always worried about these wrestling matches meaning than he had fear.
2) dangerous act: mention church(1966) and the objective test. Mention Larin (1943) to illustrate reasonable person. Then state that you will discuss causation at the end of the essay.
3) mens rea for unlawful act: use newburg and Jones (1976) when D need not foresee the death to be guilty of the offence.

4) gross negligence manslaughter in Sally's case: use adomako (1994) elements.
Talk about duty of care Donaghue and Stevenson but don't use tort facts as they are not applicable in criminal law!! Use wacker(2002) to illustrate the concept of duty of care. And mention that Sally has a duty towards Phil because she is his doctor.

6) use Bateman to explain how gross an act has to be and the fact that because dally is a medic she should have realised the risk of death.

7) causation: factual causation the "but for" test, use white(1910) to illustrate..
Legal causation the "de minimis" rule.. Use Kimsey(1996) to explain what it means. Then say that Leon would be liable unless Sally's conduct amounted to a break in causation.

8) medical professions: use cases like smith(1959), Cheshire (1991) and Jordan (1956) and then conclude that Leon will be liable if Sally's conduct is applied to Smith and Cheshire's case which seems likely in these circumstances.

The question CLEARLY asks you not to use the defence of consent so do not use it!!
I'm guessing you know most of these cases so if you structure it like this then you will get full marks in the exam.
ANYONE using this thread do not use dono and stevenson, its just a way for people to understand the concept of having someone in your contemplation. You need to be using ommision scenarios, or in general adomako. Do not mention caparo and dickman or anything of civil law!!
0
reply
LozzieT
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#10
Report 4 years ago
#10
Why should you not use the defence on consent? Should you put it in and explain why you can't use it or just not put it in at all?
0
reply
LozzieT
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#11
Report 4 years ago
#11
(Original post by Stephaniecamille)
The way to structure this question is:
Talk about unlawful act manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter and then mention causation.

1)unlawful act: Franklin(1883), lamb(1967) d and his friend fooling around with a revolver but v had no fear so no harm was done. But in the scenario Phil said he was always worried about these wrestling matches meaning than he had fear.
2) dangerous act: mention church(1966) and the objective test. Mention Larin (1943) to illustrate reasonable person. Then state that you will discuss causation at the end of the essay.
3) mens rea for unlawful act: use newburg and Jones (1976) when D need not foresee the death to be guilty of the offence.

4) gross negligence manslaughter in Sally's case: use adomako (1994) elements.
Talk about duty of care Donaghue and Stevenson but don't use tort facts as they are not applicable in criminal law!! Use wacker(2002) to illustrate the concept of duty of care. And mention that Sally has a duty towards Phil because she is his doctor.

6) use Bateman to explain how gross an act has to be and the fact that because dally is a medic she should have realised the risk of death.

7) causation: factual causation the "but for" test, use white(1910) to illustrate..
Legal causation the "de minimis" rule.. Use Kimsey(1996) to explain what it means. Then say that Leon would be liable unless Sally's conduct amounted to a break in causation.

8) medical professions: use cases like smith(1959), Cheshire (1991) and Jordan (1956) and then conclude that Leon will be liable if Sally's conduct is applied to Smith and Cheshire's case which seems likely in these circumstances.

The question CLEARLY asks you not to use the defence of consent so do not use it!!
I'm guessing you know most of these cases so if you structure it like this then you will get full marks in the exam.
Are you supposed to mention why he can't use the defence or just not mention it at all?
0
reply
Flovegrove
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#12
Report 4 years ago
#12
(Original post by LozzieT)
Are you supposed to mention why he can't use the defence or just not mention it at all?
If it says ignore the defence, don't bother writing about it at all because it is basically telling you "you will not get marks for defence of consent so don't put it there as there are plenty of other things to get marked on"
0
reply
NHM
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 years ago
#13
(Original post by ellsxxx)
ANYONE using this thread do not use dono and stevenson, its just a way for people to understand the concept of having someone in your contemplation. You need to be using ommision scenarios, or in general adomako. Do not mention caparo and dickman or anything of civil law!!
You are talking a bit of bull there, my teacher (an AQA EXAMINER) said specifically for duty you use DONOGUE and for breach you use the standard of the reasonable man.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Have you experienced financial difficulties as a student due to Covid-19?

Yes, I have really struggled financially (20)
13.25%
I have experienced some financial difficulties (42)
27.81%
I haven't experienced any financial difficulties and things have stayed the same (62)
41.06%
I have had better financial opportunities as a result of the pandemic (23)
15.23%
I've had another experience (let us know in the thread!) (4)
2.65%

Watched Threads

View All