Complete Handout/Worksheet on General Defences in English Law. Written by an experienced Law examiner and used many times in classes of my own, obtaining excellent results. This is a 25-page workbook which includes questions and highlighted key points and cases. There is an accompanying Worksheet of review questions in addition to this Worksheet. Here’s a summary of the document: The document provides an overview of various general defences in English law, including Automatism, Insanity, Duress, Intoxication, Consent, and Self-Defense/Prevention of Crime. Automatism: Automatism is divided into non-insane and self-induced automatism. Insanity: Insanity is governed by the M’Naghten Rules, which require proving a defect of reason caused by a disease of the mind, leading to a lack of understanding of the nature and quality of the act or its wrongfulness. Duress: Duress involves committing a crime under the threat of death or serious bodily harm. Intoxication: Intoxication can be a defense for specific intent crimes if it prevents the formation of mens rea. Consent: Consent is generally not a defense for causing actual bodily harm, except in cases of implied consent in sports or medical procedures. Self-Defense/Prevention of Crime: Self-defense allows the use of reasonable force to protect oneself, others, or property. Automatism vs. Insanity: The distinction between automatism and insanity often lies in whether the cause is external (automatism) or internal (insanity), leading to different legal outcomes. Duress by Threats vs. Duress of Circumstances: Duress by threats involves direct threats forcing D to commit a crime, while duress of circumstances involves committing a crime to avoid imminent harm. Voluntary vs. Involuntary Intoxication: Voluntary intoxication is self-induced and generally not a defense for basic intent crimes, while involuntary intoxication can be a defense if it negates mens rea. Proportionality in Self-Defence: The use of force in self-defense must be reasonable and proportional to the threat; excessive force invalidates the defence. An excellent resource for any AS or A Level Law student.

This is a teacher’s and student Handout which covers the entire topic of Involuntary Manslaughter. It is an ivaluable guide to the subject for any AS or A Level student and is also suitable for someone studying Access to Law or similar courses. It is 20 pages long with an estimated delivery time of around 4 hours. This is a summary of the document: The document provides a detailed overview of involuntary manslaughter, distinguishing between Unlawful Act Manslaughter and Gross Negligence Manslaughter, and examining various legal cases to illustrate the principles involved. Definition and Distinction: Involuntary manslaughter occurs when the defendant (D) has the actus reus for murder but lacks the necessary mens rea, meaning D did not intend to kill or cause serious harm. Types of Involuntary Manslaughter: There are two types: Unlawful Act Manslaughter and Gross Negligence Manslaughter. Unlawful Act Manslaughter: This type involves causing death while carrying out a dangerous criminal act. It must be proven that the act was unlawful, dangerous, caused the death, and that D had the mens rea for the act. Case Examples for Unlawful Act Manslaughter: Cases such as Lamb, Goodfellow, and Mitchell illustrate the principles of Unlawful Act Manslaughter, showing how the act must be unlawful and dangerous, and how causation is established. Gross Negligence Manslaughter: This type involves a breach of duty of care that causes death and is deemed ‘gross’ negligence, worthy of criminal punishment. The leading case is Adomako. Duty of Care and Breach: To establish Gross Negligence Manslaughter, it must be shown that D owed a duty of care to V, breached that duty, and that the breach caused V’s death. Key Legal Principles: Cases like Donoghue v Stevenson and Caparo v Dickman help determine the duty of care, while cases like Litchfield and Singh illustrate breaches of duty leading to liability. Gross Negligence Standard: The negligence must be so severe that it goes beyond mere compensation and shows a disregard for life, as seen in Bateman and Edwards. Scenarios and Questions: The document provides various scenarios and questions to help readers understand the application of these legal principles and determine the appropriate type of manslaughter. Summary of Legal Cases: A table summarizing the main legal principles of key cases is provided, helping to consolidate understanding of involuntary manslaughter. This Handout has been updated in light of recent cases and has been used with groups of students across many cohorts and has achieved excellent results.

This is a “model answer”, written by an experienced Law Examiner to a common question on Delegated Legislation. It is 2-pages long and will take up approximately 60 minutes of teaching time, including a discussion of the answer. Here is a brief summary of the document titled “Model Answer - Delegated Legislation”: The document provides a model answer for an AQA A Level Law question on delegated legislation. It covers three main areas: Types of Delegated Legislation: The document describes two types of delegated legislation: Statutory Instruments and Orders in Council. Statutory Instruments are rules and regulations made by government ministers, while Orders in Council are made by the Queen and the Privy Council, allowing ministers to make laws without going through Parliament. Judicial Controls: It explains how judicial control of delegated legislation occurs through Judicial Review. Delegated legislation can be challenged in courts if it is ‘ultra vires’ (beyond the powers granted). Examples include cases like R v Home Secretary ex parte Fire Brigades Union and Strickland v Hayes Borough Council. Advantages of Delegated Legislation: The document discusses several advantages, such as saving parliamentary time, allowing for technical expertise, enabling consultation with experts, quick law-making, and ease of amendment.

This is a Handout on the Law of Murder, written by an experienced examiner and used over many years with my students. It is a short introduction to the topic and is an invaluable aid for AS and A Level students of the subject. It is 7-pages long and it is estimated that it would take about 60-minutes of teaching time. There are questions and exercises throughout. The Handout is structured as follows: Definition and Jurisdiction of Murder: Murder is defined as the unlawful killing of a reasonable person under the Queen’s peace with malice aforethought, and British citizens can be charged with murder committed in any country. Actus Reus Elements: The actus reus of murder includes four elements: D killed, a reasonable creature in being, under the Queen’s Peace, and the killing was unlawful. The document primarily focuses on the first element. Importance of Causation: For murder, it is crucial to prove that D’s act or omission caused the death of V, with examples like Gibbins v Proctor illustrating how omissions can fulfill actus reus. Reasonable Person in Being: The term refers to a human being, with complexities arising in cases involving a foetus or brain-dead individuals. Unlawful Killing: Killing is unlawful unless it is in self-defence, defence of another, or prevention of crime with reasonable force. Mens Rea for Murder: Murder requires specific intent, meaning the jury must be convinced of an intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm, as illustrated in cases like Vickers and Swift. Indirect or Oblique Intention: Issues arise when D’s primary aim is different from causing death or serious injury, but death results, requiring examination of indirect intention. An invaluable introduction to murder for any students of the subject!

A short Handout and questions on the law on Diminished Responsibility written by an experienced examiner of Law and delivered to my own students across many cohorts and students. This 7-page Handout is all that you need to teach and study Diminished Responsibility. The Handout is structured as follows: Definition and Legal Basis. Application in Trials: A defendant cannot be charged with voluntary manslaughter directly; it is a verdict the jury may reach if the defense of diminished responsibility is successfully pleaded during a murder trial. Criteria for Diminished Responsibility: To qualify for diminished responsibility, the defendant must prove an abnormality of mental functioning arising from a recognized medical condition that substantially impaired their ability to understand their conduct, form rational judgments, or exercise self-control. Impact of the Defence. Case Law Examples: Several cases illustrate the application of diminished responsibility, including BYRNE, where a sexual psychopath’s conviction was reduced to manslaughter, and LUC THIET THUAN, where a head injury did not qualify as a recognized medical condition. Substantial Impairment: The defence requires that the abnormality of mental functioning substantially impair the defendant’s abilities, such as understanding their conduct or forming rational judgments, as seen in the GITTENS case. Challenges in Application: Juries sometimes disregard the defense of diminished responsibility, as seen in the SUTCLIFFE case, where the defendant was convicted of murder despite evidence of mental abnormality. An invaluable set of notes for anyone studying this vital concept in Law.

This is a 10-page student Handout written by an experienced A Level Law Examiner, which has been tried and tested with many groups and across many years. The Handout covers the topic of how morality has influenced the law. It covers such topics as the different theories of law and the ideas of legal theorists and looks at how practical examples from recent times, such as the Discrimination Act, was influenced by morality. An essential aid to the topic for any students/teachers of morality and law.

This is a model answer, written by an experienced Law Examiner, to the question, “What is the association between law and morality?”. It is 4-pages or 1500 words long and provides an insight in how to answer questions on this difficult topic. It includes all of the main legal theorists such as Bentham and Rawls and can be adapted to suit other questions on the topic.

Written by an experienced Law Examiner, this set of student notes on “Views on Morality” is invaluable any any students and teachers of A Level Law. The Handout explores the relationship between law and morality, focusing on the Hart-Devlin debate and various legal theorists’ views. Hart vs. Devlin on Law and Morality: Hart argued that law should remain separate from morality, while Devlin believed law should enforce moral standards. Sources of Morality: Morality can be influenced by family, media, religion, and education, and while some aspects can be enforced, others cannot. Paternalist vs. Liberal Views: Paternalists argue that law should guide and protect people, while liberals believe law should not interfere in private lives. Functions of Law: Summers and Raz identified practical functions of law such as providing remedies, prohibiting harmful conduct, and settling disputes. Hart’s Distinction Between Legal and Moral Rules: Hart distinguished legal rules, which can be changed and enforced by authorities, from moral rules, which are subject to social pressure and personal sacrifice. Fuller’s Guidelines for Law: Fuller proposed that laws should be well-considered, known, understandable, consistent, and not require the impossible, among other criteria.

This is a 9-page student Handout, written by an experienced Law Examiner, which provides a guide as to what to include when answering questions on law and morality. The Handout discusses legal cases involving the intersection of law and morality, focusing on battered women who kill violent partners and the withdrawal of life support from comatose patients. Sara Thornton’s Case: Sara Thornton’s murder conviction was quashed after arguments that her violent husband provoked her, highlighting the recognition of “battered women’s syndrome” in legal defenses. Law and Morality: The document explores the relationship between law and morality, referencing debates and cases such as R v R, which questioned the legality of marital rape, and the evolving legal perspectives on moral issues. Tony Bland’s Case: Tony Bland’s case involved the withdrawal of life support for a Hillsborough disaster victim in a persistent vegetative state, marking a significant legal decision on medical treatment and end-of-life issues. This is designed for the AQA Specification but could be used with any students studying the topic of law and morality.

This 5-page Handout or Worksheet consists of revision questions on the topic of Law and Morality. Written by an experienced Law Examiner, it wraps up the study of the topic and ensures that students also undertake some research (on the Bulger case) as well. Designed for the AQA Specification, this Worksheet can be used with any students undertaking study of this vital topic.

This is a 22-page student Handout/Worksheet on the various theories of Justice. Written by an experienced Examiner in Law and used with classes with excellent results. A summary of the Handout is below: The document discusses various legal cases and theories of justice, exploring different perspectives on fairness and legal principles. Case of Reeves: Two men convicted of receiving stolen goods received different sentences; one was fined £25 in the Magistrates’ Court, while the other, who elected for a jury trial, was sentenced to nine months in prison but was released after serving three months due to the perceived disparity in sentencing. Perelman’s Justice Theories: C. H. Perelman identified six meanings of justice, including formal and substantive justice. His ideas emphasize the importance of following correct procedures and ensuring that the rules themselves are just. Beycan Case: The Court of Appeal quashed Beycan’s conviction for supplying heroin because he was not informed of his right to legal advice, violating Perelman’s principles of justice. Promissory Estoppel: Lord Denning introduced the concept of promissory estoppel in the case of Central London Property v High Trees House to ensure substantive justice, preventing a party from going back on a promise if others have relied on it in good faith. Aristotle’s Justice: Aristotle’s theories of distributive and corrective justice are illustrated through cases like Jebson v Ministry of Defence and Beswick v Beswick, emphasizing proportionate compensation and restoring balance. Utilitarianism: Utilitarianism, associated with Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, focuses on maximizing happiness for the greatest number, but it faces criticism for potentially justifying immoral acts if they increase overall happiness. John Rawls’ Theory: John Rawls’ theory of justice emphasizes fairness through the ‘veil of ignorance’ and includes the principles of liberty and the difference principle, which aims to benefit the least well-off members of society. The Handout contains questions and exercises throughout and gives a thorough examination of the topic.

This is a 6-page “model answer” written by an experienced Examiner, to the question “What is the association between law and justice?” The Handout discusses various theories of justice, including Natural Law, Positivism, Distributive Justice, Corrective Justice, Utilitarianism, and Social Justice. It highlights the differing views of theorists like Aristotle, Karl Marx, Jeremy Bentham, and John Rawls on how justice should be achieved and applied in society. The document also examines the application of these theories in procedural and substantive law, and concludes that justice is a subjective concept, with different interpretations leading to varying outcomes in legal cases. An invaluable aid to the study of Law and Justice.

This is an introduction to the complex topic of Law and Justice. It is designed to be distributed to students and it includes questions and activities and also provides a “model answer” to a common question on the topic. The Handout is structured as follows: Definitions of Justice: Justice is associated with fairness, equality, and the proper administration of the law, with various perspectives provided by philosophers like Aristotle, Bentham, Rawls, and Nozick. Aristotle’s View: Aristotle divides justice into distributive justice, concerning the fair allocation of resources, and corrective justice, dealing with rectifying wrongs. Bentham’s Utilitarian Approach: Bentham’s utilitarian idea of justice aims to achieve the greatest happiness for the greatest number, though it has limitations. Rawls’s Theory: Rawls emphasizes fairness and equality, focusing on protecting the least advantaged members of society. Nozick’s Conservative View: Nozick offers a conservative alternative, focusing on individual rights and the minimal state. Case Studies: Several case studies illustrate the complexities of achieving justice, highlighting issues such as disproportionate punishments and the ethical implications of severe penalties. Barriers to Justice: Barriers include the unrepresentative legal profession, limited access to legal advice and representation, and biases in the administration of justice. Legal Theories’ Insights: Legal theories provide insights into the relationship between law and justice, with various definitions highlighting different dimensions like formal/procedural justice and substantive justice.

This is a 16-page student Handout and activity sheet which covers a vital topic in A2 Law. Written by an experienced Examiner and used with his classes over the years. Here’s a summary of the document: The Handoutt discusses the relationship between law and morality, focusing on the Sexual Offences Act (1967) and the case of DPP v Knuller (1972). It explores how legal decisions reflect societal changes and moral debates. Sexual Offences Act (1967): The Sexual Offences Act (1967) partially decriminalized homosexual acts between consenting adults over 21 in private, following the recommendations of the Wolfenden Report (1957). Wolfenden Report: The Wolfenden Report recommended decriminalizing private homosexual acts between consenting adults over 21, sparking significant public debate and influencing the Sexual Offences Act. Homosexual Law Reform Society: The Homosexual Law Reform Society, founded in 1958, aimed to persuade Parliament to reform laws on homosexuality, highlighting the societal shift in moral values. Law Lords’ Decision: In DPP v Knuller, the Law Lords upheld the conviction for conspiracy to corrupt public morals but quashed the conviction for outrage public decency, citing the need to consider contemporary standards. Case of Re A (Children): The case of Re A (Children) involved the separation of conjoined twins, with the Court of Appeal deciding based on the lesser of two evils, emphasizing the moral complexities in legal decisions. Pretty and Purdy Cases: The cases of Pretty and Purdy addressed the issue of assisted suicide, with courts emphasizing that changes to the law are a matter for Parliament, not the judiciary.

A 26-page student Handout which represents everything students need to know about Substantive, Procedural Justice and Equity. Written by an experienced Examiner and delivered to his classes successfully over many years. The document explores various aspects of justice, including substantive and procedural justice, equity, and the role of judicial review in holding public bodies accountable. Substantive Justice: Substantive justice examines the content of laws and measures them against fundamental principles like fairness and morality. Equity in Law: Equity fills gaps in common law by providing remedies where common law is insufficient, as illustrated by historical cases and principles. Equitable Remedies: Equitable remedies include freezing injunctions, search orders, and orders of specific performance, which compel defendants to act or refrain from certain actions. Case Study: Ryan Giggs: Ryan Giggs sought an injunction to prevent the publication of private information, highlighting the complexities and breaches of such orders. Case Study: Tinsley v Milligan: The case illustrates the tension between equitable ownership and illegal actions, with the House of Lords ruling in favor of Milligan despite her fraudulent behavior. Damages in Civil Law: Damages aim to restore the claimant’s financial position, with special and general damages addressing specific and non-specific losses respectively. Judicial Review: Judicial review allows courts to assess the lawfulness of public body decisions, serving as a critical check on governmental power. Controversy Over Judicial Review Reforms: Proposed reforms to judicial review have sparked debate, with critics arguing that they undermine the ability to hold the government accountable.

An excellent Handout for students of AS and A Level Law which revises General Defences in English Law. The Worksheets are best used with the accompanying resource: General Defences in English Law. This 9-page Handout consists of: Defences and Burden of Proof: The document includes a table to complete, showing the defences (automatism, consent, duress, insanity, intoxication, self-defense) and the burden of proof for each. Automatism and Insanity: It discusses the differences between non-insane automatism and self-induced automatism, and the principal difference between automatism and insanity. Duress and Intoxication: The document poses true or false questions about duress and intoxication, referencing various cases such as Graham, Cole, Bowen, Abdul Hussain, and others to illustrate key legal principles. Case Scenarios: Several scenarios are given for analysis, asking which defences might be appropriate and assessing the likelihood of success for each defence. An excellent resource Worksheet for any students and teachers of Law.

A 7-page student Handout/Worksheet on the defence of loss of control. Written by an experienced Law Examinaer and used with many groups and classes across the years. The Handout is structured as follows: This defence, along with diminished responsibility, can reduce a murder charge to voluntary manslaughter if successfully pleaded. It replaces the old defence of provocation and is outlined in the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. A person (D) is not convicted of murder if: D’s actions resulted from a loss of self-control. The loss of self-control had a qualifying trigger. A person of D’s sex and age, with normal tolerance and self-restraint, might have reacted similarly. The Act provides guidelines for these points, with cases from the old provocation defence serving as illustrations. If D shows evidence of loss of control, the prosecution must disprove it. Key Cases: Doughty: D killed his baby due to continuous crying. The Court of Appeal quashed his murder conviction, stating provocation should have been considered. Thornton: D, a battered wife, killed her husband. The Court recognized ‘battered wife syndrome’ and quashed her murder conviction. Ahluwalia: D killed her abusive husband after hours of contemplation. The defence of provocation was accepted on appeal. Ibrams: D planned and killed V after a week of provocation. The defence failed as D had time to cool off. Humphreys: D, a prostitute, killed her abusive pimp. The Court of Appeal allowed her characteristics to be considered in the defence. The defence is not available if D acted out of revenge or had time to cool off. Certain characteristics, like age and sex, are relevant in assessing if a hypothetical person would act similarly. However, temporary states of mind or mood are not considered relevant characteristics.

FREE resource A summary table of the non-fatal offences in English Law written by an experienced examiner in Law and used with countless classes across the years. Invaluable for students and teachers at any level who are studying this vital component. If you have found this resource useful, why not take a look at my other, ever-growing collection, of law resources. All designed to save busy teachers time and effort. Why reinvent the wheel?!