Duty of Care in Legal Medicine and Emergency Services Quiz

Rv Cunningham 1957 = Recklessness is defined as a subjective awareness of a risk and going on to take that risk. R v Gullefer = Defined the 'more than merely preparatory' test for the actus reus of attempt crimes. R v Galbraith = If there's no evidence upon which a jury could convict, the case should not proceed. Fagan v MPC 1969 = An act can become assault if there's a continuing act and the mens rea (guilty mind) is formed during that act.

Rv Cunningham 1957 = Defendant ripped a gas meter from the wall to steal money, causing a gas leak. R v G & R 2003 = Two young boys set fire to newspapers, causing a large fire. R v Gnango 2012 = A shootout between two men resulted in the death of an innocent bystander. R v Gullefer = Defendant attempted to rob a dog race track by claiming a false race.

R v Ireland 1997 = Silence can amount to an act of assault. R v R 1991 = Established that a husband can be guilty of raping his wife. Bree 2007 = If a person has the capacity to choose and does choose to drink and have intercourse, this can be seen as valid consent. R v Gnango 2012 = Both participants in a 'joint enterprise' can be liable for the consequences, even if they did not directly cause the harm.

<p>R v Dougal 2005 = Difficulty in proving impairment from drugs in driving cases R v B 2007 = Reiterated the importance of genuine consent in sexual offenses R v Kemp 1975 = Established that a disease of the mind can be a defense, even if it has a physical cause R v Burgess 1991 = Sleepwalking was considered a form of automatism and not insanity</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>R v Bailey 1983 = If a person knows they might become aggressive due to a condition and does nothing, they can be held criminally responsible R v Byrne 1960 = Broadened the definition of 'abnormality of mind' for the defense of diminished responsibility R v Miller 1972 = Established the duty to act in certain situations and that failing to act can be a criminal act R v Hobson 1997 = Established that parents have a duty of care towards their children</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>R v Ahulwalia 1993 = Introduced the concept of 'slow burn' reaction in cases of battered women syndrome R v Campbell 1997 = Acts that are 'more than merely preparatory' can be considered attempted crimes R v Seers 1984 = Chronic depression can be considered an 'abnormality of mind' for the defense of diminished responsibility R v Lidar 1999 = Reiterated the importance of intention in murder cases</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>R v Bateman = Defined gross negligence and its role in manslaughter R v Adomako 1994 = Established the 'Adomako Test' for gross negligence manslaughter R v Misra &amp; Srivastava 2005 = Emphasized the high standard of proof required for gross negligence manslaughter Donoghue v Stevenson 1932 = Established the modern concept of negligence and the 'neighbor principle'</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire 1987 = Police owe no duty of care to potential victims of a known criminal Kent v Griffiths and Others 2000 = Emergency services can owe a duty of care when they are aware of the urgency and potential harm West Bromwich Albion Football Club v Medhat El-Safty 2006 = Medical professionals owe a duty of care, but causation and breach must be proven Darnley v Croyden Health Services NHS Trust 2018 = Hospitals owe a duty of care to patients, including providing accurate information about wait times</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>R v Bateman 1925 = Defined gross negligence in the context of manslaughter Capital and Counties plc v Hampshire CC 1997 = Emergency services can be liable if their actions worsen a situation, but this is rare Tredget v Bexley Health Authority 1994 = Medical professionals and institutions owe a duty of care to ensure equipment is safe and functioning Alcock v Chief Constable Sth Yorks Police 1992 = Defined the criteria for &quot;secondary victims&quot; in negligence claims</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>R (Davies) v HN Deputy Coroner for Birmingham 2003 = Established the breadth and limits of a coroner's inquest Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee 1957 = Established the &quot;Bolam test&quot; for medical negligence, which assesses actions against what a responsible body of doctors would do De Freitas v O’Brien 1993 = Clarified the standards of care and the need for informed consent in medical procedures Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority 1997 = Modified the &quot;Bolam test&quot; by adding that the medical opinion must be logical and defensible</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Pearce v United Bristol NHS Trust 1999 = Even if there's a breach of duty, causation must be proven to establish negligence Muller v Kings College Hospital 2017 = Emphasized the importance of timely medical intervention and the consequences of delays Barnett v Kensington and Chelsea Hospital Management Committee = Established that a breach of duty must have materially contributed to harm Caparo Industries v Dickman 1990 = Established the &quot;Caparo test&quot; for duty of care, considering foreseeability, proximity, and whether it's fair, just, and reasonable</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Gregg v Scott 2005 = Loss of a chance of a better medical outcome is not compensatable in English law. Chester v Ashfar 2004 = Established the importance of informed consent and that patients should be aware of material risks. Re T (Adult, refusal of medical treatment), 1992 = Established that adults with capacity have the right to refuse medical treatment, even if it leads to their death. Airedale NHS Trust v Bland 1993 = Established that it's lawful to withdraw life-sustaining treatment from patients in a persistent vegetative state.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Hotson v East Berkshire Health Authority 1987 = A boy's hip injury was allegedly misdiagnosed leading to disability. Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board 2015 = Concerned the risks of shoulder dystocia not being discussed with a diabetic pregnant woman. Re C (Adult, refusal of treatment) 1994 = A schizophrenic patient refused amputation of a gangrenous foot. An NHS Trust and others v Y 2018 = Concerned withdrawing treatment from a patient in a vegetative state without seeking court approval.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>St George’s Healthcare NHS Trust v S = The court can intervene if a patient's decision puts their life at risk, especially if there's a viable fetus. R v Collins and others, ex parte s 1998 = Established that detained patients have the same rights as others to refuse treatment. Re B (adult: Refusal of Medical Treatment) 2002 = Reiterated the right of competent adults to refuse life-sustaining treatment. Cheshire &amp; Wirral Partnership NHS Foundation Trust v Z 2016 = Established that force-feeding can be in the best interests of a patient, even if it's against their wishes.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Re MB (Adult, medical treatment) 1997 = Fear or phobia can vitiate consent, but treatment can be given if it's in the patient's best interest. P v Cheshire West and Chester Council = Defined what constitutes a &quot;deprivation of liberty&quot; for mentally incapacitated adults. P &amp; Q v Surrey County Council 2014 = Further clarified the criteria for &quot;deprivation of liberty&quot; in care arrangements. R (LF) v HM Senior Coroner for Inner London 2017 = Established the breadth and limits of a coroner's inquest in cases of medical treatment.</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Ms B v An NHS Hospital Trust 2002 = Affirmed the right of competent adults to refuse medical treatment, even if it results in death Burke v GMC 205 = Patients cannot demand treatments that doctors consider not to be in their best interests W v Edgell 1990 = Public safety can override patient confidentiality in certain circumstances Z v Finland 1997 = Disclosure of a patient's medical records without consent violated the right to respect for private and family life</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority 1985 = Established the &quot;Gillick competence&quot; test, where minors can consent to medical treatment if they fully understand it Axon, R v Secretary of State for Health, 2006 = Reaffirmed the &quot;Gillick competence&quot; and the right of minors to medical confidentiality R (A Minor) (Wardship Medical Treatment) 1993 = The court can override parental wishes if it's in the best interests of the child Re W (A Minor) Medical Treatmentl Courts Jurisdiction) 1992 = The court can intervene and order medical treatment if it's in the best interests of a child, even against their wishes</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>An NHS Foundation Trust Hospital v P 2014 = Decisions should be based on the patient's best interests, considering their past wishes and feelings Re J (specific issue orders: Muslim upbringing and circumcision) 2000 = Circumcision was not in the child's best interests without the consent of both parents Re (A Child: Immunisation) 2018 = The court held that vaccination was in the best interests of the child Glass v UK 2004 = The treatment violated the child's human rights</p> Signup and view all the answers

<p>Re TM (medical treatment) 2013 = The proposed treatment was in the child's best interests Re v Y 2018 = Legal permission is not always needed to withdraw treatment if it's in the patient's best interests and there's no dispute An NHS Trust v MB 2006 = It was in the child's best interests to continue treatment, even if chances of improvement were slim Re L and B (Children: Specific issues: temporary leave to remove from jurisdiction; circumcision) 2016 = Circumcision should be deferred until the children are old enough to make their own informed decisions</p> Signup and view all the answers