Criminal law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words - 1

Criminal law - Essay Example Based on the decision of the court in the case of DPP v Newbury2, the person performing the act need not be aware that the act is dangerous in order for the person to be held liable for involuntary manslaughter in the event where the said act resulted in the death of another. b. Liability of Kathryn By virtue of her job, Kathryn had the duty to take the message correctly and act on it accordingly. Unfortunately, Kathryn failed to take the message of Tom properly which sent the ambulance in the wrong direction. According to the court in the case of Donoghue v Stevenson3, one must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions that may cause harm on another person. The relationship between the parties is very important to establish criminal liability against each other. In establishing the â€Å"Neighbor test† in this case, Lord Atkins said that whoever will be directly affected by the acts of a person shall be considered as a neighbor of that person. The decision on the court in the case of Caparo v Dickman4 reinforced the idea that a person who is affected by the act of another may hold the other as liable for the injuries or loss that he or she may suffer. In defining when a person may be liable for tort of negligence as against the other, the court said in the case of Caparo v Dickman5 that there must be a harm foreseen, there is a sufficiently proximate relationship between the people involved and the imposition of a duty of care is just and equitable. Should Kathryn be held liable for the death of Alf? The cause of Alf’s death is extensive head trauma and if it can be shown that he would have died anyway even if the ambulance got to him or time, Kathryn may not be held liable for his death. The key here is the actual cause of death of the victim and if Kathryn did not contribute to the actual cause of the death of the victim, then she cannot be held liable for such death. However, she cannot be exonerated from her negligent act. According to the court in the case of Nettleship v Weston6, a professional is expected to exhibit a standard of care required of his or her profession. Since Kathryn is trained to handle emergency calls, she is expected to exhibit professionalism. As it is, she should have confirmed the address with the caller before dispatching the ambulance. c. Liability of Karen There are two incidents in our case that involve Karen, first, she was sent to attend to Alf and second, she responded to the call of Zola regarding the wounds suffered by Peter. In the first instance, Karen was given wrong directions to the house of Alf and Beryl which caused her to arrive 20 minutes late. If Karen can prove that she exercised due diligence in following the directions given by the dispatcher, she cannot be held liable for negligence of duty. According to the court in the case of Caparo v Dickman7, where the duty of care exist and the person who is bound to exercise such duty fulfilled the same, that person cannot hel d liable for injuries and loss suffered by the other. In the case of Karen, she was merely following the directions given to her and she could not have known at that time that the address given to her was wrong. When it comes to the second incident, Karen requested Tom to come to the hospital with her but Tom