CRIMINAL LIABILITY FOR
OMISSIONS
• In this lecture, we will consider:
• The general position under the criminal
law of liability for omissions.
• The reasons for this rule.
• The requirements for the imposition of
liability.
• The general principle in the criminal law
is that liability for omissions is the
exception, rather than the rule.
REASONS WHY
An unwillingness to infringe an
individual’s personal freedom and force
him to play the good Samaritan.
 The difficulty in establishing that a
person has by his omission caused the
harm required for liability for the
particular offence.

Requirements for the
imposition of liability
Liability will only be imposed when 2
questions are answered in the
affirmative:
 1. Is the offence capable of being
committed by omission?
 2. Was the D under a legal duty to act?

• Are all offences capable of being
committed by omission? Can, for
example, an assault, see Fagan (1969).
The common law duties
•
•
•
•
Contractual
Special relationship
Voluntarily assumed duty
Where D inadvertently creates a dangerous
situation whereby life or property are at risk
• A duty to act, breach of which gives rise to
liability for a common law misdemeanour.
Contractual duty
• The classic example is the
employer/employee relationship.
• See, for example, Pittwood (1902).
Doctors and other medical
practitioners
Doctors and nurses owe a contractual
duty to their patients.
 Doctors are under no absolute duty to
prolong the patient’s life regardless of
the circumstances (Airedale NHS Trust
v Bland (1993).

Special relationship
Close family relationships may give rise
to a duty e.g. between:
 parent and child (Senior (1899)) and
(Gibbins and Proctor (1918))
 Duty extends to those in loco parentis.

How long does such a duty
last?
Does it last until the child reaches 18?
 Or leaves full-time education?
 In Shepherd (1862), no duty was held to
be owed by a parent to her “entirely
emancipated” 18 year old daughter.
 Might an adult child owe a duty to an
elderly parent?

Husband and wife
• See Smith (1979), which left the
position unclear, and Bonnyman (1942)
in which a duty was imposed on a
husband but this is not a good authority
as he was also his wife’s doctor.
• Probably no duty if separated.
Is there a duty between cohabitees?
 No special relationship exists between
siblings (William Smith (1826)).

Voluntary assumption of a
duty
Relevant caselaw:
 Nicholls (1874)
 Instan (1893)
 Stone & Dobinson (1977)

Where D inadvertently creates
a dangerous situation whereby
life or property are at risk




Leading case is Miller (1983).
D owes this duty only when he realises that
he has created the dangerous situation.
The duty is to take reasonable steps to
prevent or reduce harm/damage to persons
or property at risk.
This is often called the principle of
SUPERVENING FAULT.
A duty to act, breach of which
gives rise to liability for a
common law misdemeanour.
• See, for example, Dytham (1979)
Statutory Duties
• Parliament has been more willing than
the courts to impose liability for
omissions, see for example, S.6 RTA
1988.
• Why might this be so?