Loss of Control Defence and Diminished Responsibility
This law lecture looks at an actionable Misrepresentation in Contract Law. An actionable misrepresentation i.e. a misrepresentation that is capable of founding a court action for misrepresentation, must consist of certain elements which are discussed in detail below. If one of these elements is missing, the misrepresentation will not be actionable and there will be no remedy available for misrepresentation. A Misrepresentation is a unambiguous, false, statement of fact (or law), addressed to the party misled, which is material and induces the contract, and causes loss.
Learning Outcomes
At the end of this lecture you will be able to do the following:
recognise the applicability of the defences of loss of control (previously called provocation) and diminished responsibility;
understand the development of and current law relating to loss of self control;
understand the law relating to diminished responsibility;
apply the law relating to murder to any given factual situation.
Key Cases
Loss of Control
R v Richens [1993] 4 All ER 877
R v Martin (Anthony)[2002] Crim LR 136
R v Ahluwalia [1992] 4 All ER 889
R v Humphreys [1995] 4 All ER 1008
Limitations on the use of the defence
R v Ibrams & Gregory (1981) 74 Cr App R 154
R v Johnson [1989] 2 All ER 839
Bedder v DPP [1954] 2 All ER 801
DPP v Camplin [1978] 2 All ER 168
R v Ahluwalia [1992] 4 All ER 889
R v Smith (Morgan) [2000] 4 All ER 289
Intoxication and Loss of Control
R v Morhall [1995] 3 All ER 659
R v Byrne [1960] 3 All ER 1
R v Tandy [1989] 1 All ER 267
Diminished Responsibility
R v Byrne [1960] 3 All ER 1
R v Tandy [1989] 1 All ER 267
Intoxication and Diminished Responsibility
R v Dietschmann[2003] 1 AC 1209
R v Stewart[2009] EWCA Crim 593
This law lecture looks at an actionable Misrepresentation in Contract Law. An actionable misrepresentation i.e. a misrepresentation that is capable of founding a court action for misrepresentation, must consist of certain elements which are discussed in detail below. If one of these elements is missing, the misrepresentation will not be actionable and there will be no remedy available for misrepresentation. A Misrepresentation is a unambiguous, false, statement of fact (or law), addressed to the party misled, which is material and induces the contract, and causes loss.
Learning Outcomes
At the end of this lecture you will be able to do the following:
recognise the applicability of the defences of loss of control (previously called provocation) and diminished responsibility;
understand the development of and current law relating to loss of self control;
understand the law relating to diminished responsibility;
apply the law relating to murder to any given factual situation.
Key Cases
Loss of Control
R v Richens [1993] 4 All ER 877
R v Martin (Anthony)[2002] Crim LR 136
R v Ahluwalia [1992] 4 All ER 889
R v Humphreys [1995] 4 All ER 1008
Limitations on the use of the defence
R v Ibrams & Gregory (1981) 74 Cr App R 154
R v Johnson [1989] 2 All ER 839
Bedder v DPP [1954] 2 All ER 801
DPP v Camplin [1978] 2 All ER 168
R v Ahluwalia [1992] 4 All ER 889
R v Smith (Morgan) [2000] 4 All ER 289
Intoxication and Loss of Control
R v Morhall [1995] 3 All ER 659
R v Byrne [1960] 3 All ER 1
R v Tandy [1989] 1 All ER 267
Diminished Responsibility
R v Byrne [1960] 3 All ER 1
R v Tandy [1989] 1 All ER 267
Intoxication and Diminished Responsibility
R v Dietschmann[2003] 1 AC 1209
R v Stewart[2009] EWCA Crim 593
This law lecture looks at an actionable Misrepresentation in Contract Law. An actionable misrepresentation i.e. a misrepresentation that is capable of founding a court action for misrepresentation, must consist of certain elements which are discussed in detail below. If one of these elements is missing, the misrepresentation will not be actionable and there will be no remedy available for misrepresentation. A Misrepresentation is a unambiguous, false, statement of fact (or law), addressed to the party misled, which is material and induces the contract, and causes loss.
Learning Outcomes
At the end of this lecture you will be able to do the following:
recognise the applicability of the defences of loss of control (previously called provocation) and diminished responsibility;
understand the development of and current law relating to loss of self control;
understand the law relating to diminished responsibility;
apply the law relating to murder to any given factual situation.
Key Cases
Loss of Control
R v Richens [1993] 4 All ER 877
R v Martin (Anthony)[2002] Crim LR 136
R v Ahluwalia [1992] 4 All ER 889
R v Humphreys [1995] 4 All ER 1008
Limitations on the use of the defence
R v Ibrams & Gregory (1981) 74 Cr App R 154
R v Johnson [1989] 2 All ER 839
Bedder v DPP [1954] 2 All ER 801
DPP v Camplin [1978] 2 All ER 168
R v Ahluwalia [1992] 4 All ER 889
R v Smith (Morgan) [2000] 4 All ER 289
Intoxication and Loss of Control
R v Morhall [1995] 3 All ER 659
R v Byrne [1960] 3 All ER 1
R v Tandy [1989] 1 All ER 267
Diminished Responsibility
R v Byrne [1960] 3 All ER 1
R v Tandy [1989] 1 All ER 267
Intoxication and Diminished Responsibility
R v Dietschmann[2003] 1 AC 1209
R v Stewart[2009] EWCA Crim 593