Você está na página 1de 2

R v Pittwood [1902] TLR 37

The defendant was employed by a railway company to man the


gate at a level crossing. The defendant lifted the gate to allow a
cart to pass and then went off to lunch failing to put it back down.
A train later collided with a horse and cart killing the train driver.
The defendant was liable for the death of the train driver as it
was his contractual duty to close the gate.
v Miller [1983] 2 AC 161 House of Lords
The defendant had been out drinking for the evening. He went back to
the house he had been staying in and fell asleep on a mattress with a
lighted cigarette in his hand. He awoke and saw that the cigarette had
started a small fire. Upon seeing the fire, he then got up and went to
another room and went back to sleep. At his trial, the prosecution did not
rely on the acts of the defendant in falling asleep with a lighted cigarette
as being reckless, but relied solely on the grounds that upon becoming
aware of the fire he failed to take steps to put the fire out or call the fire
brigade.
Held:
The defendant had created a dangerous situation and owed a duty to call
the fire brigade upon becoming aware of the fire. He was therefore liable
for his omission to do so.
R v Stone & Dobinson [1977] 1 QB 354
Ted Stone was 67, totally blind, partially deaf had no appreciable sense of
smell and was of low intelligence. He lived with his housekeeper and
mistress of 8 years, Gwendolyn Dobinson aged 43 who was described as
ineffectual and inadequate. Ted's sister Fanny came to live with them.
She had previously lived with another sister but had fallen out with her.
She had mental problems and was suffering from anorexia nervosa. Ted
and Gwendolyn took her in and agreed to look after her. However, Fanny's
condition deteriorated and she was found dead in her bed in appalling
conditions.
Stone and Dobinson were found liable for her death as they had assumed

a responsibility to her by taking her in. They failed to look after her and
ensure she got the medical help she needed.
Fagan v MPC [1969] 1 QB 439
A policeman was directing the defendant to park his car. The
defendant accidentally drove onto the policeman's foot. The
policeman shouted at him to get off. The defendant refused to
move. The defendant argued at the time of theactus reus, the
driving onto the foot, he lacked the mens rea of any offence since
it was purely accidental. When he formed the mens rea, he lacked
the actus reus as he did nothing.
Held:
The driving on to the foot and remaining there was part of a
continuing act.
R v Dytham [1979] QB 722
The defendant was a police officer. He stood by whilst a bouncer kicked a
man to death. He was charged with the offence of misconduct in a public
officer. He argued that the offence could not be committed by an
omission as it specifically requires misconduct.
Held:
The offence of misconduct in a public offence can be committed by an
omission. The defendant's conviction was upheld.

Você também pode gostar