Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The criteria set out in Mohan did not include a stand-alone requirement for experts to have independence and impartiality, but many of the lower courts have attempted to infer such a requirement. [ 1 ] [ 2 ] In 2013, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal held that that is not required. [ 3 ]
Intent is defined in English law by the ruling in R v Mohan [1976] QB 1 as "the decision to bring about a prohibited consequence" (malum prohibitum). [1] [2] [3] A range of words represents shades of intent in criminal laws around the world. The mental element, or mens rea, of murder, for example, was historically called malice aforethought.
In England and Wales the legal test of fitness to plead is based on the ruling of Alderson B. in R v Pritchard. The accused will be unfit to plead if they are unable: to comprehend the course of proceedings on the trial, so as to make a proper defence; or; to know that they might challenge any jurors to whom they may object; or
Decision of Mr Justice Turner: Farrakhan v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2001] EWHC 781 (Admin) (1 October 2001), High Court (England and Wales) Decision of the Court of Appeal: R (on the application of Farrakhan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2002] EWCA 606 (30 April 2002), Court of Appeal (England and Wales)
The House of Lords delivered the following exposition of the rules: . the jurors ought to be told in all cases that every man is to be presumed to be sane, and to possess a sufficient degree of reason to be responsible for his crimes, until the contrary be proved to their satisfaction; and that to establish a defence on the ground of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the time of the ...
Mahavir Singh was a member of Naujawan Bharat Sabha.He helped in the escape of Bhagat Singh, Batukeshwar Dutt and Durgawati Devi from Mauzang House in Lahore. [3]He was arrested as part of the Second Lahore Conspiracy Case and took part in the Hunger Strike of 1933 to protest the treatment of prisoners along with Mohit Moitra (convicted in Arms Act Case) and Mohan Kishore Namadas (convicted in ...
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Donate
In R v Matthews and Alleyne, [4] the Court of Appeal concluded that the Woollin test was an evidential rather than substantial rule of law: judges ought to instruct jurors that they may interpret what they would see as certain knowledge on the defendant's part of the virtually certain consequence of death as evidence of intention, but Woollin ...