Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In criminal law, criminal negligence is an offence that involves a breach of an objective standard of behaviour expected of a defendant. It may be contrasted with strictly liable offences, which do not consider states of mind in determining criminal liability, or offenses that requires mens rea , a mental state of guilt.
Whether the mens rea is intent or wilfulness, or only negligence or recklessness, does not affect the incidence of guilt, but may well raise the question of degree of guilt. On the other hand, "guilt" is the result of a verdict to the effect that the accused is criminally responsible ("finding of guilty"), and it is in this sense that the ...
In the case of negligence, however, the mens rea is implied. Criminal law recognizes recklessness as one of four main classes of mental state constituting mens rea elements to establish liability, namely: Intention: intending the action; foreseeing the result; desiring the result: e.g. murder.
The Court was divided upon the decision, having a vote of 6-4 (one justice died a month before its promulgation). But it was later on accepted as valuable jurisprudence, starting with the subsequent case of People of the Philippines v. Geronimo (100 Phil. Reports 90). The case is now a standard case study in Philippine law schools.
Gross negligence is used as a standard for criminal law, for example, under manslaughter in English law. [4] Under common law, criminal negligence is defined as a gross deviation from a reasonable standard of care. This is a higher standard than ordinary negligence under tort law.
Republic Act No. 386, the Civil Code of the Philippines (1949). Act No. 3815, the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines (1930). The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines. Luis B. Reyes, The Revised Penal Code: Criminal Law 20 (1998, 14th ed.). Antonio L. Gregorio, Fundamentals of Criminal Law Review 50-51 (1997).
Division Superintendent (219 SCRA 256, G.R. No. 95770 et al. (1993) was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the Philippines concerning freedom of religion in schools.
Most requirements for a successful actus reus require a voluntary act, or omission, for evidence of fault. There is also a requirement for a clear causation, there is no liability or fault if the defendant was not actually the sole cause of the act, this is so if there was an intervention of a third party, an unexpected natural event, or the victim's own act.