His daughter died after he failed to call a doctor; here, the rationale being that he had not foreseen the consequences of this failure. It is submitted this argument is overly cautious in its unwillingness to criminalise an omission, suggesting that parents caring for infants do not have a duty to know when to call for medical help.
While this judgment was influenced by the low intelligence of both the father and the mother, surely such knowledge is a non-derogable requirement of parenthood, and as Mr Lowe had had children taken from him before, he ought to have been even more vigilant in the circumstances.
She was poorly cared for and developed infected bedsores as a result of her condition. She contracted pneumonia and passed away after being taken to hospital for treatment. This particular case is interesting due to the family dynamic it encompasses. While parents have a natural responsibility to care for their underage children, there is a debate to be had on whether children have a responsibility to care for their parents, and whether that responsibility is a natural or legal one.
In this case, neither the daughter nor her partner wanted the mother in their home. There is an argument to be made that the law should not impose a duty of care on them where they had no choice in the matter.
Omissions are also penalised when the defendant is a public servant, as these people have duties to safeguard the public and their failure to do so can have very serious consequences. One harrowing Irish example is DPP v Bartley, [6] where a woman endured sexual abuse by her stepbrother for 25 years after her complaint to a Garda was ignored.
The Garda was ultimately found to have failed in their duty to investigate all credible claims. The earlier case, R. Both these cases establish the important precedent that police officers have a duty of care to all of society, and because of the high-stakes nature of their work, failing to act when they clearly should have acted can lead to criminal convictions. This ensures that they feel obliged to perform their job correctly and comprehensively and that the public receives the protection they deserve.
One of the more abstract conditions where an individual can be held criminally liable for an omission is in a situation where they created a danger to others.
In R v Miller, [8] the House of Lords found the defendant guilty of arson by omission. He had fallen asleep with a cigarette in his hand, woken up to find the mattress on fire, and instead of making an effort to put the fire out, moved to another room and allowed the building to be damaged.
This established a common-sense precedent that a person who creates a danger is under a legal duty to alleviate the effects of that danger. The Court of Appeal extended this principle in R v Evans, [9] where they upheld a manslaughter conviction.
The defendant had acquired heroin for her sister on which she overdosed and died, but both she and her mother did not seek medical help for fear of legal trouble. These rulings are not consistent with the emphasis put on autonomy and free will in criminal law, [10] but nonetheless, they are justified. In both of these cases, the defendants acted callously in failing to mitigate danger and prevent serious harm to others when they could have easily done so. In recent years it has been persuasively argued by both Glover and Bennett that, celeris paribus , omissions to prevent a harm are just as culpable as are actions which bring that harm about.
View via Publisher. Save to Library Save. Create Alert Alert. Share This Paper. Citation Type. Has PDF. Publication Type. More Filters. Scots Criminal Law and Liability for Omissions. It has been asserted that it is only in certain restricted circumstances that an omission is regarded as criminal conduct. The law can have regard only to legal obligations and it does not enforce … Expand. Beyond acts and omissions: remark-able criminal conduct.
Abstract I argue that instead of analysing a criminal offence's conduct element in terms of acts and omissions, we should ask whether the defendant has belied a contextually salient expectation as to … Expand. A plea for omissions. In an attempt to identify elements that all criminal prohibitions have in common, many theorists, most of whom have been deemed adherents of "orthodox criminal law theory," have proposed a number of … Expand.
The Wrongs of Unlawful Immigration. For too long, criminal law scholars overlooked immigration-based offences. Proprietary Estoppel and Responsibility for Omissions. Publications Pages Publications Pages. Recently viewed 0 Save Search. Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Find in Worldcat. Go to page:.
Your current browser may not support copying via this button. Search within book. Subscriber sign in You could not be signed in, please check and try again. Username Please enter your Username. Password Please enter your Password. Forgot password? You could not be signed in, please check and try again.
0コメント