Duty of Care in Legal Medicine and Emergency Services Quiz

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

Match the following case laws with their key legal principles:

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.

Match the following case laws with their corresponding events:

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.

Match the following case laws with their significant outcomes:

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.

Match the following court cases with their key legal principles:

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 Signup and view all the answers

Match the following court cases with their key legal principles:

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 Signup and view all the answers

Match the following court cases with their key legal principles:

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 Signup and view all the answers

Match the following court cases with their key legal principles:

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 & 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' Signup and view all the answers

Match the following legal cases with their primary legal principles:

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 Signup and view all the answers

Match the following legal cases with their related legal conclusions:

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 "secondary victims" in negligence claims Signup and view all the answers

Match the following legal cases with their associated legal principles:

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 "Bolam test" 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 "Bolam test" by adding that the medical opinion must be logical and defensible Signup and view all the answers

Match the following legal cases with their primary legal outcomes:

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 "Caparo test" for duty of care, considering foreseeability, proximity, and whether it's fair, just, and reasonable Signup and view all the answers

Match the following legal cases with their key legal principles:

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. Signup and view all the answers

Match the following legal cases with their brief descriptions:

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. Signup and view all the answers

Match the following legal cases with their implications on medical treatment:

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 & 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. Signup and view all the answers

Match the following legal cases with their implications on patient rights and consent:

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 "deprivation of liberty" for mentally incapacitated adults. P & Q v Surrey County Council 2014 = Further clarified the criteria for "deprivation of liberty" 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. Signup and view all the answers

Match the following legal cases with their key principles:

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 Signup and view all the answers

Match the following legal cases with their key principles:

Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority 1985 = Established the "Gillick competence" test, where minors can consent to medical treatment if they fully understand it Axon, R v Secretary of State for Health, 2006 = Reaffirmed the "Gillick competence" 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 Signup and view all the answers

Match the following legal cases with their key principles:

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 Signup and view all the answers

Match the following legal cases with their key principles:

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 Signup and view all the answers