Chapter 17: Reckless Manslaughter

Question 1

What is the history of reckless manslaughter?

What are the relevant cases in this timeline?

Answer 1

1) There were 2 schools of thought in the beginning - R v Adomako [1994]

• Reckless manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter is one and the same thing
• Reckless manslaughter is the 3rd type of charge under manslaughter

2) Adomako approved the decision in R v Sulman & Prentice

3) And later Prentice approved the Bateman test of gross negligence, where manslaughter by negligence involving breach of duty

4) Until R v Lidar [2000] - COA affirmed that there remained a separate species of involuntary manslaughter - reckless manslaughter (RMS)

Question 2

RMS isin’t doesn’t really have elements, how is it established?

Answer 2

1. When an unlawful act (CMS); and
2. special relationship (GNMS) can’t be established;
3. then the last option is reckless manslaughter

Question 3

R v Lidar [2000]

Answer 3

Facts

1. Lidar (D) had a dispute with the V, and drove his car away from the pub
2. V who was hanging (victim’s decision) from the window of the D’s car, fell onto the ground
3. Was ran over and died from injuries

Held (3 principles)

1. Held that D must foresee the risk of death as highly probable and unreasonably runs the risk (which satisfies the test)

Takeaway

1. D had to have actually foresee the risk of serious injury to be guilty of involuntary manslaughter
2. There was no duty of care to begin with
3. As the V himself created the dangerous situation (by hanging onto the car)