WJEC A-Level Law 603-1978-1
Law Making in Wales and the UK
Delegated Legislation
Statutory Interpretation
Judicial Precedent
The Civil Courts and Dispute Resolution
The Criminal Process and the Criminal Courts
Legal Personnel and the Judiciary
Access to Justice and Funding
Tort: Rules and Theory
Tort: Negligence
Tort: Occupiers' Liability
Tort: Remedies
Human Rights: Rules and TheoryHuman rights
Human Rights: Key Convention ProvisionsHuman rights
Human Rights: RestrictionsHuman rights
Human Rights: EnforcementHuman rights
Human Rights: Protection and ReformHuman rights
Contract: Rules and TheoryContract
Contract: FormationContract
Contract: TermsContract
Contract: Misrepresentation and DuressContract
Contract: DischargeContract
Contract: RemediesContract
Criminal Law: Rules and TheoryCriminal
Criminal Law: General Elements of LiabilityCriminal
Criminal Law: Offences Against the PersonCriminal
Criminal Law: Property OffencesCriminal
Criminal Law: DefencesCriminal
Criminal Law: Preliminary OffencesCriminal
Criminal Law: General Elements of Liability
Evaluating fault, strict liability and the general principles
- 3 things to know
- A2 Units 3 and 4
Overview
Why fault is regarded as central to criminal liability and criticism that strict liability offends the presumption of innocence.
What you need to know
Answer each one before you reveal it.
Give one argument that the law on oblique intention should be put on a statutory footing.
Give one argument against defining intention in a statute.
Questions from this subtopic
Each one with the model answer underneath.
- 1
Explain why fault is regarded as central to criminal liability.
Model answer
Punishment is justified by blame, so the criminal law normally requires the defendant to have chosen the harm or run an unjustified risk of it before condemning them.
- 2
Give one argument that the law on oblique intention should be put on a statutory footing.
Model answer
A statutory definition would replace a jury entitlement with a clear rule, removing the inconsistency in outcomes that the virtual certainty direction currently allows.
- 3
Give one argument against defining intention in a statute.
Model answer
Any fixed form of words will meet facts its drafters never imagined, and leaving the jury a margin allows the law to respond to the moral quality of what the defendant did.
- 4
How is the abolition of Caldwell recklessness defended?
Model answer
Convicting a defendant who never saw a risk punishes a failure of thought rather than a choice, and R v G (2003) restored the principle that serious crime turns on the defendant's own awareness.
- 5
Give one criticism of the purely subjective test of recklessness.
Model answer
A defendant who does not trouble to think about an obvious danger escapes liability, so the more indifferent a person is to the safety of others the better their position becomes.
- 6
Explain the criticism that the rules on causation are manipulated to secure convictions.
Model answer
Courts have declined to find a break in the chain even after grossly poor medical care, so the operating and substantial cause test can look like a policy conclusion dressed up as fact.
Other ways to work this
The same content, four other ways.
What is inside Levo
Six ways to work the same material.
Every question in Criminal Law: General Elements of Liability, 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.