levo

Evaluation in Criminal Law

  • 1 subtopics
  • 4 things to know
  • Component 1

What Evaluation in Criminal Law covers

How well the criminal law works and where reform has been proposed.

Where it is assessed

Component 1

Criminal law, Section B of the first paper.

Check the OCR specification ↗

The 1 subtopics

Each one has its own page.

What you need to know

Answer each one before you reveal it.

Your recallNot started
Evaluation

What is the continuing act theory and what criticism might be made of it as a solution to coincidence problems?

Evaluation

Why might objective tests of fault like negligence be considered inappropriate for criminal liability?

Evaluation

What is the principal argument against imposing criminal liability for omissions?

Key term

How does the law distinguish between voluntary acts and those performed under automatism?

Take Evaluation in Criminal Law further

The same content, four other ways.

Commonly confused

Pairs that lose marks when they are blurred together.

  • Fault-based liability vs Strict liability

    Fault-based liability: liability requiring proof of a guilty mind. Strict liability: liability requiring no mens rea as to at least one element.

  • Codification vs Consolidation

    Codification: bringing the criminal law together into a single statute. Consolidation: reissuing existing statutes on a subject without changing the law.

  • Certainty in the criminal law vs Flexibility

    Certainty in the criminal law: the value that people should know in advance what is forbidden. Flexibility: the value that the law should adapt to circumstances the drafters did not foresee.

Questions from this topic

Each one with the model answer underneath.

  1. 1

    What criticism is commonly made regarding the clarity of the categories establishing a duty to act in omissions liability?

    Model answer

    The categories (contractual duty, special relationship, voluntary assumption of responsibility, creation of danger, public office) have developed piecemeal through case law and lack clear statutory definition, making it difficult for individuals to know when they are under a legal duty to act.

  2. 2

    What is the principal argument against imposing criminal liability for omissions?

    Model answer

    Criminal law traditionally punishes positive acts rather than failures to act, reflecting the principle of individual autonomy. Imposing liability for omissions may unfairly criminalise those who simply fail to be Good Samaritans, potentially extending criminal responsibility too widely.

  3. 3

    What argument supports imposing criminal liability for failing to act in certain circumstances?

    Model answer

    Where a defendant has a special relationship or has assumed responsibility, their failure to act may be morally equivalent to causing harm directly. Society has a legitimate interest in requiring those with duties to fulfil them, particularly to protect vulnerable individuals.

  4. 4

    How might the 'but for' test for factual causation produce unfair outcomes?

    Model answer

    The test can be over-inclusive, catching defendants whose contribution to the result was minimal, or under-inclusive in cases involving multiple sufficient causes where each defendant could argue the result would have occurred anyway.

  5. 5

    What criticism is made of the rules on breaking the chain of causation regarding consistency?

    Model answer

    The rules lack consistency: medical negligence rarely breaks the chain unless 'palpably wrong', yet victim actions may break it if 'daft'. This creates uncertainty and arguably treats similar intervening events differently without clear principled justification.

  6. 6

    Why might the distinction between direct and oblique intention be considered difficult to apply in practice?

    Model answer

    Direct intention (purpose) is straightforward, but oblique intention requires juries to assess whether death or serious harm was virtually certain and whether the defendant appreciated this. This involves complex psychological assessment and may lead to inconsistent verdicts.

What is inside Levo

Six ways to work the same material.

1Closed book
2Open book
3Closed book

The 3-step method, run for you

Answer cold, learn it, then prove it stuck. Levo tracks the jump between your first attempt and your last.

Civil Courts and Other Forms of Dispute Resolution
Criminal Courts and Lay People
Legal Personnel
Access to Justice

Cram a whole paper in one sitting

Sort every topic into what you know and what you do not, then drill only the weak ones.

The Council of .
EuropeMinistersJustice

Blank Blitz makes facts automatic

Rapid timed gap-fills on the terms and numbers you need to recall without thinking.

AThe injury to the claimant's rights is small.
BThe injury is capable of being estimated in money.
CThe injury can be adequately compensated by a small payment.

Build It gets the exam shape right

Assemble a full-mark answer from its marking points, in the order an examiner wants them.

Royal Assent has not been refused since 1708.
TrueFalse

Test It catches misconceptions

Spot the fault in a statement. The traps are the mistakes students actually make.

721941163128510

Brain Breaks between sessions

Short focus games to reset attention, so the next set lands better than the last.

Evaluation in Criminal Law revision questions

What does Evaluation in Criminal Law cover in OCR A-Level Law?
1 subtopics: evaluating criminal law. Each one has its own page with questions and model answers.
How is Evaluation in Criminal Law organised?
By the OCR H418 specification, subtopic by subtopic, so it matches the order you are taught it in.

Every question in Evaluation in Criminal Law, on a schedule.

Attempt a question from memory, write the correct version, then attempt it again. Levo records the jump between your first attempt and your last, and brings each question back on the day you are due to forget it.

Or £46 a year, about £3.83 a month. Cancel anytime.