The general elements of criminal liability: actus reus (including omissions and causation), mens rea (intention and recklessness), the coincidence rule, transferred malice and strict liability.

What this dot point is asking

OCR Component 1 Section B requires you to know the building blocks of every criminal offence: the actus reus (the guilty act), the mens rea (the guilty mind), and the rules that connect them, causation, the coincidence rule and transferred malice, plus the special category of strict liability. These elements underpin every offence in the course, so the scenario questions assume you can identify and apply them.

The answer

Actus reus

The general rule is that there is no liability for an omission: English law does not punish a mere failure to act. Liability for an omission arises only where the defendant owes a legal duty to act, which can come from:

• a statute (for example a duty to provide a breath specimen);
• a contract (Pittwood, a gatekeeper who failed to close a level-crossing gate);
• a special relationship (parent and child);
• a voluntary assumption of care (Stone and Dobinson, who took in a sick relative);
• creating a dangerous situation and then failing to avert it (Miller, who set a mattress alight and did nothing).

Causation

For result crimes (such as murder), the prosecution must prove that the defendant caused the consequence.

• Factual causation uses the "but for" test: but for the defendant's act, would the result have occurred? In White, poison did not cause the victim's death (she died of an unrelated heart attack), so factual causation failed.
• Legal causation requires the defendant's act to be a more than minimal (operating and substantial) cause (Smith, where a stabbing remained the operating cause despite poor medical treatment). The thin-skull rule means the defendant takes the victim as found (Blaue, where the victim's refusal of a blood transfusion on religious grounds did not break the chain).
• The chain of causation can be broken by an intervening act (novus actus interveniens), such as a free, voluntary act of the victim or a third party, or wholly unforeseeable medical negligence (Jordan).

Mens rea

The mens rea is the guilty mind required for the offence. The two main forms are:

• Intention. Direct intention is the defendant's aim or purpose (Mohan). Oblique intention arises where the result was not the aim, but the jury may find intention if the consequence (death or serious injury) was a virtual certainty and the defendant appreciated that (Woollin, refining Nedrick).
• Recklessness. Subjective recklessness is foreseeing a risk and unreasonably going on to take it (Cunningham; confirmed as subjective in R v G, overruling the objective Caldwell test). The test is what this defendant actually foresaw.

The coincidence rule, transferred malice and strict liability

Examples in context

A strong scenario answer names the rule, cites the case, and applies it to the exact facts before concluding.

Try this

Q1. Explain, with examples, the circumstances in which a person can be criminally liable for an omission. [12 marks]

• What the marker wants. Precise AO1: the general rule of no liability for omissions, then the duty situations (statute, contract Pittwood, relationship, voluntary assumption Stone and Dobinson, creating danger Miller), each with the case.

Q2. Anna pushes Ben during an argument. Ben, who has an unusually thin skull, falls, hits his head and dies. Discuss whether Anna caused Ben's death. [20 marks]

• Cue. An AO2 application of causation: factual ("but for", White), legal (more than minimal operating cause, Smith), and the thin-skull rule (Blaue, take your victim as you find them), concluding that Anna in law caused the death.