De Minimis

cruais

Hi guys

Quick question.

Can anyone recommend any links for the De minimis test in regards to manslaughter.

Im in the middle of an assignment and have been searching for hours.

Thanks a mill

nuac

It's a while since I studied Criminal Law, but cannot recall "de minimis non curat lex " ( the law does not concern itself with trifling matters) applying to such a serious matter

cruais

nuac wrote: »

It's a while since I studied Criminal Law, but cannot recall "de minimis non curat lex " ( the law does not concern itself with trifling matters) applying to such a serious matter

Thanks a million.

I know, I am shocked that this is the test I have been told to use in regards to manslaughter. Without giving too much away. Appellent charged with manslaughter, appealed and had the conviction quashed, now the DPP are re-appealing with the argument that the de minimis test is correct.

C.Law was a subject I really enjoyed, however, after this assignment I am now dreading!

davindub

It rings a bell, search for Larkin in Uk database circa 1940's, I'm not sure if it was this case or this case get's mentioned a lot as part of the discussion, but it might get you started.

SetOverSet

davindub: I think that case you're thinking of is R v Larkin (1942)

OP, I'm only a first year student myself so hopefully not giving you a bum steer, but have a look at R v Cato (1976) where it was held that the prosecution had to prove that the defendant's act was actually a cause of death and not de minimis.

Denny_Crane

SetOverSet wrote: »

davindub: I think that case you're thinking of is R v Larkin (1942)

OP, I'm only a first year student myself so hopefully not giving you a bum steer, but have a look at R v Cato (1976) where it was held that the prosecution had to prove that the defendant's act was actually a cause of death and not de minimis.

Don't let giving someone a bum steer stop you (unless it legal advice and don't give that). Any student that suffers from a bum steer has only themselves to blame! :pac: Use what you learn, keep using it every chance you get to talk about it and enjoy your studies. Encourage your classmates to do the same.

Loved every minute of my law degree apart from the 180 minute sections at the end of the semesters.

Edit: Sorry realised I didn't address the OP. Looks like it's a discussion on quite a narrow area of Causation. I found that sometimes you want to get extremely specific and other times you want to link in the surrounding material. That's not a bum steer but a **** steer I'm afraid. Basically if you find loads of articles on the specific subject you can guarantee it's specifics time.

SetOverSet

Denny_Crane wrote: »

I found that sometimes you want to get extremely specific and other times you want to link in the surrounding material. That's not a bum steer but a **** steer I'm afraid. Basically if you find loads of articles on the specific subject you can guarantee it's specifics time.

Denny_Crane: I'd be interested to know what you mean both **** steer and by about specifics etc.? Not being a smart a***, by the way, I'm genuinely interested.

My understanding of the de minimis principle is that the defendant's act must have contributed to the death in some sufficient or substantial way and wasn't so insignificant that it could be ignored. The only case I could think of earlier was Cato which was a manslaughter case, but there's also the more recent Irish case DPP v Davis [2001] 1 IR, subsequently followed in DPP v Dunne (2014).

Denny_Crane

SetOverSet wrote: »

Denny_Crane: I'd be interested to know what you mean both **** steer and by about specifics etc.? Not being a smart a***, by the way, I'm genuinely interested.

My understanding of the de minimis principle is that the defendant's act must have contributed to the death in some sufficient or substantial way and wasn't so insignificant that it could be ignored. The only case I could think of earlier was Cato which was a manslaughter case, but there's also the more recent Irish case DPP v Davis [2001] 1 IR, subsequently followed in DPP v Dunne (2014).

I basically said, it's a narrow area so the lecturer either wants you to be very specific or not, essentially saying it could be anything. I was referring to myself being of zero help with the nugget of pure useless information! :pac:

It looks like a question on causation to me. DPP v Davis as per Hardiman J is probably where the question is headed but that's a guess of course. Unfortunately with the passing of the late, great bon vivant there seems to be some reversals of Hardiman's take on the criminal law. Good or bad thing, well I suppose that's for the OP to comment on in his homework!

cruais

Thanks for all the replies.

Yes so far am enjoying my degree. Im trying to balance it in the evenings with a full time job and a toddler so it makes for interesting times, but it is something that I have always had an interest in and so decided to finally bite the bullet this year.

In regards to the assignment, yes I also think it is based around causation. I have to approach it as a problem style question and will be applying the ILAC method.

Whether or not it is going to be 100% up to scratch is another thing. That dreaded infuenza doing the rounds seems to have got me aswell, and so have been signed off work for the next week. Im hoping with the extra time off I can get the 5 assignments out of the way!

Denny_Crane

Do your best and feck it in. You'll be amazed what'll pass. I always was.

cruais

Denny_Crane wrote: »

Do your best and feck it in. You'll be amazed what'll pass. I always was.

I just need to get off boards lol

Denny_Crane

cruais wrote: »

I just need to get off boards lol

TBH at least 50% of my assignments where from boards.

hullaballoo

Does that mean you owe me tutelage fees?

Denny_Crane

hullaballoo wrote: »

Does that mean you owe me tutelage fees?

I owe you (and a couple of other to be fair) my bloody sanity at this stage!

cruais

You will probadly be getting to know me a lot better in this place soon enough

flatty

If you have flu, you won't be doing any assignments. Trust me.

cruais

flatty wrote: »

If you have flu, you won't be doing any assignments. Trust me.

Unfortunately I have no choice. I have been bed bound the past few days, not sleeping at night with the pain, but during the day have the laptop in bed to work on them as they are due in very shortly.

cruais

Me back again

So im onto a new assignment. One I havent got a huge amount of interest in but needs must!

Basically I have to write a memorandum on the availability of civil legal aid in Ireland. A man wishes to take a civil litigation matter against his neighbour for nuisance as he plays loud music all night. The man wishes to use civil legal aid to do this as he doesnt have the financial means.

Now, my theory on writing a memorandum was to address who it was to, date, what the question is, the law, apply the law, and conclude.

Here is my stumbling block. How am I supposed to find law and its application when the question only asks me to advice of the availability?

Yes, I can find plenty of cases on nuisance etc but I dont think there is much point in popping those in. Can anyone help?

Denny_Crane

I'm confused. Is your question on the availability of legal aid or nuisance?

I think answering this will put you on the right track. Ask yourself would the question be the same if it was another area of civil law, defamation, say. If it is then write about legal aid. Reference nuisance in the availability of legal aid only and not the substantive elements. Perhaps alternatives are available that would mean legal aid may not be appropriate?

cruais

Thanks Denny

Yes the question is on the availability of civil legal aid in Ireland.

I have started by using the Civil Legal Aid Act 1995 which then gave way for the establishment of the legal aid board by the oireachtas under the above act.

I then describe how legal aid is for civil matters and does not apply to criminal matters as this can only be applied by a Judge through court.

I then plan on stating all the factors that would qualify one for legal aid and how one goes about applying

Am I leaving anything out do you think?

Thank you all so much for your help.

cruais

I have hit the wall! I feel like everything is so near, yet so far away! I am on my last assignment! Four already submitted, and my final one on tort!

Background:
Prisons are renowned to be dangerous places, however prisoners are entitled to expect irish prison officers to provide them with protection against attack by other prisoners. What is reasonable care depends on the situation. Prison authorities may have to thread a delicate line between the achievement of the objective of protecting the safety of prisoners and the risks of adopting unduly repressive and inhumane measures. They must balance the protective function and possible demand for instructive searches against the need to permit prisoners an appropriate degree of freedom of movement and human dignity.

I need to discuss in relation to the above the standard of care required by the State in discharging the duty of care owed to prisoners in Irish prisons.

I am planning on speaking about negligance ie duty of care etc. Any other tips?

Denny_Crane

Look at the IPRT and their material. Ireland has, for whatever reason, dodged a huge cow pat in terms of prisoners rights. How they've not be sued left right and centre over human rights breaches is beyond me. Scotland, for example, did not manage to avoid such a legal minefield.

Seems like a simple tort question with scope to go very deep indeed as to what is an acceptable duty of care in a particular setting. Always remember that the interesting points in negligence are always public policy based. Tort is, inter alia, a loss distribution mechanism.

OP do you mind me asking where you're studying?

cruais

Denny_Crane wrote: »

Look at the IPRT and their material. Ireland has, for whatever reason, dodged a huge cow pat in terms of prisoners rights. How they've not be sued left right and centre over human rights breaches is beyond me. Scotland, for example, did not manage to avoid such a legal minefield.

Seems like a simple tort question with scope to go very deep indeed as to what is an acceptable duty of care in a particular setting. Always remember that the interesting points in negligence are always public policy based. Tort is, inter alia, a loss distribution mechanism.

OP do you mind me asking where you're studying?

Thanks Denny. I defo owe you a few pints! Im studying in GCD. Hoping none of my lecturers are looking at this thread!

Denny_Crane

I doubt it, there was one who used to post here under his own name. Besides no one will mind you getting 'inspiration' from things like boards. Most of legal assignments are plagiarism anyway, hence the tight referencing standards. A tip if I may is to get familiar with these now as they're easy marks. OSCOLA is a monumental PITA to keep looking up do just get used to using it.

While you should always set the argument, forwarding your own opinion should be minimal. It should be there though!

davindub

cruais wrote: »

I have hit the wall! I feel like everything is so near, yet so far away! I am on my last assignment! Four already submitted, and my final one on tort!

Background:
Prisons are renowned to be dangerous places, however prisoners are entitled to expect irish prison officers to provide them with protection against attack by other prisoners. What is reasonable care depends on the situation. Prison authorities may have to thread a delicate line between the achievement of the objective of protecting the safety of prisoners and the risks of adopting unduly repressive and inhumane measures. They must balance the protective function and possible demand for instructive searches against the need to permit prisoners an appropriate degree of freedom of movement and human dignity.

I need to discuss in relation to the above the standard of care required by the State in discharging the duty of care owed to prisoners in Irish prisons.

I am planning on speaking about negligance ie duty of care etc. Any other tips?

I'm not sure if you are clear you will probably need to start using case law in the subjects? It's ok to express an opinion but you will need to comment on actual tests and standards developed by the courts.

2 importants cases, Muldoon v Ireland and Bates v Minister of Justice... there will be a lot of caselaw.