Search

Road traffic is present in every person's life, considering that, at various times, we can all become participants to it. Alongside the benefits that road traffic provides us with, it is also presenting risks that are indulged in our societies. Even though the legislator has set rules to ensure the safety of traffic participants, the frequent violation of these rules, leads to serious injuries and even death of some individuals. Thus, traffic offenses are some of the most frequent crimes in relation to which Romanian courts are notified about. In the category of these offences, a primary role is played by the subjective element that can provide major differences in the legal qualification of the deed, respectively in the sphere of criminal liability. It has become a notorious fact that, from a legal point of view, that indirect intent can barely be delimitated from foreseeable fault, an issue that transposes itself also in the area of traffic incidents. Until recently, the traditional view was that all traffic accidents are committed with criminal negligence rather than intent. However, if we take into account the substantial evolution of traffic starting with the increasing number of participants, the evolution of speed, the capabilities of the vehicles today up to the frequency of the gross violation of traffic rules, we conclude that a paradigm shift is needed. In extreme situations, indirect intent must also be taken into consideration. The difference in the sanctioning of indirect intent and foreseeable fault makes the delimitation between the two in road traffic accidents a paramount issue. The present study tackles precisely this issue of the distinction between indirect intent and foreseeable fault in road traffic accidents by trying to clarify some controversial hypothesis by referring to relevant studies and a few eloquent examples of Romanian case law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Chilena de Derecho is the property of Revista Chilena de Derecho and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article presents a court case R. v. Winterton (Andrew), in which a Court of Appeal judge dismissed the appeal of the defendant, a construction site manager, who was charged with gross negligence manslaughter when a labourer died due to a collapsed trench at a housing development site.

The article focuses on the interrelated bases upon which a court should find the laws prohibiting criminal negligence causing death to be constitutionally invalid and need of adoption of a subjective mens rea for criminal negligence causing death.

The article offers information on the history, drawbacks and legal reforms to prosecution of manslaughter by criminal negligence of physicians in various jurisdictions in Australia. It discusses the case of Jayant Patel, the Director of Surgery at Bundaberg Base Hospital, Queensland, which reflects prosecutorial failure of the criminal justice system of Australia to address the fraud charges associated with deaths.

The article discusses the lawsuit HKSAR v. Lai Shui Yin related to gross negligence manslaughter (GNM) in Hong Kong, China. Topics discussed include importance of mens rea in issues related to GNM, imposition of mandatory lengthy sentences in the cases of GNM, and issues of recklessness associated with GNM in comparison to gross negligence.

The article discusses corporate criminal liability and crimes such as price fixing which are committed by corporate senior officers in Canada as of January 2014, focusing on criminal negligence and the corporate liability provisions of Canada's Criminal Code. The vicarious liability legal principle is mentioned, along with several criminal law cases involving entities such as Metron Construction Corp. and Pétroles Global Inc. Corporate compliance systems and agency law are also examined.

The article focuses on the judiciary enforcement of the law on the decision of deterrent penalties to be inflicted on corporations liable for workplace-related criminal negligence.

The article focuses on the calls for the introduction of the offense of corporate manslaughter in the Pike River coal mine disaster that occurred on November 19, 2010 in Greymouth, New Zealand. Topics include the reformation of the corporate liability framework in New Zealand and the organizational fault model.

Copyright of Socialinių Mokslų Studijos is the property of Mykolas Romeris University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article discusses federal criminal law amendments and presents a summary of criminal cases which were appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada prior to December 7, 2012, including legal matters dealing with topics such as Canada's Motor Vehicle Act, criminal negligence, and dangerous driving. In the case R v. Dineley, the court addressed amendments to the nation's Criminal Code, breathalyzer tests, and defendant Dineley's constitutional rights under the laws of Canada.

Copyright of Collected Papers of the Faculty of Law in Split / Zbornik Radova Pravnog Fakulteta u Splitu is the property of Split Faculty of Law and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article discusses a court case of King v. The Queen wherein the plaintiff was convicted for culpable driving leading into death. The issues related to criminal negligence were considered along with lesser alternative verdict and the considerations by the trial jury. The decisions made by the Court of Appeals wherein the court dismissed the plaintiff's application for leave to appeal are also discussed.

The article discusses the court cases Williams & others v Fred Olsen Cruise Lines Ltd. and Sewell v Saga Holidays wherein the principle res ipsa loquitur in the law of negligence of duty was applied in both cases. The court held that the defendants are liable for their failure to provide passenger safety and accident prevention measures. It considers the incident of the Costa Concordia cruise ship which suggests that the cruise industry should set safety standards and risk management strategies.

The article focuses on the Australian court case R. v. Patel, which dealt with criminal negligence in a case of medical manslaughter. Topics include the burden of proof required to prove criminal negligence, the legal accountability placed on health care workers, and if medical manslaughter remedies are effective as a means of deterrence.

The article provides a brief description and history of the "insanity defense", which is a legal defense on which the mentally disordered may rely and is now referred to as "not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder" (NCR). It further states that recklessly exacerbating one's own mental disorder with the resulting injury or death of another should be considered criminal negligence and elaborates on the possible forms of punishment which should accompany the proposed offence.

Copyright of Romanian Journal of Compulsory Execution / Revista Română de Executare Silită is the property of Universul Juridic Publishing House and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article discusses the use of immunity by a state officer to protect himself from civil litigation from violation consistent under the Brady versus (v.) Maryland. It discusses the extent of use of immunity and states that despite violating the Due Process Clause for hiding evidences, it offers chances to resolve conflict of circuits' decision and that state actor should be protected when they fail to do their duties in prosecutorial function. It says that immunity limits civil litigation of police error under Brady, but alternative liability is held for intentional concealment of evidences. It also mentions the Daniels v. Williams case, wherein Brady violation was allowed and rules of immunity by state officers was rejected due to carelessness and negligence.

Copyright of Revista Ciência & Saúde Coletiva is the property of Associacao Brasileira de Pos-Graduacao em Saude Coletiva and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Internet Services Provider(ISP) can be divided into Internet Content Provider( ICP), Internet Access Provider( IAP) and Internet Platform Provider( IPP). ICP should be responsible for what contents it provides, and IAP can' t be convicted as an auxiliary criminal. It follows that the relevant judicial interpretation is questionable. As to the IPP, what it did should not be regarded as an auxiliary criminal, since the help it provides usually belongs to a neutral behavior without the danger impermitted by law. The behavior of any companies who provide P2P softwares and other related services usually belongs to normal business operation, and it is improper to consider such a behavior as a danger which should be convicted insomuch as an auxiliary criminal to be punished. The proper way is to deny that their help behavior is guilty and they are auxiliary criminals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the criminal liability of juristic persons in Estonia based on the Penal Code of 2002. It is stated that 2002 Penal Code increased the number of crimes imposed on juristic persons and the sanctions include pecuniary punishment and compulsory dissolution. It notes that a legal person may be responsible for both intentional and negligent acts and the Supreme Court indicated that a legal person may be responsible for an act executed by an employee, which is ordered by the legal person. It also mentions that the crimes in the Estonian criminal law are punishable in the European Union (EU) acts, but the problem lies in the identification of persons whose acts can be imputed to a legal person.

It is necessary to pay attention objectively to the understanding of the constituent elements when accusing a crime due to doing no report or doing false report of a safety casualty, such as "the fact that one didn't report or did false report", "conditions of a safety casualty" and "delaying the rescue and/or salvage in casualty". The principle of concurrent punishment for several crimes is regarded as reasonable if the crime of safety casualty correlated with other similar crimes done by the same one (s). However, the relevant criminal(s) should be accused just according to the crime of safety casualty itself if it correlated with the guilt of misuse of authority and/or ignoring one' s duty. Now the crime is legally and usually attributed to the case of involuntary violation of law, but in the case there are some complicated internal contradictions to a certain extent. So, defining simply the crime as a case of involuntary violation of law is a legislative oversight, and it is necessary to modify one of the law provisions to the case, i.e. , change "the cases of gross violation" to "the cases of causing severe event". It implies that perfecting legislatively the relevant provisions for the crime by getting rid of the degree of violation but by the severity of the actual result of the criminal act. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Analyzes the case R versus Lavender regarding the involuntary manslaughter by criminal negligence in New South Wales. Facts of the case; Arguments raised by the defendant; Decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal.

The article discusses the survey conducted by the Australian Institute of Criminology regarding the covert phenomena of abuse and neglect of the elderly in Australia. It highlights the number of issues in relation to the elderly as victims of crime, abuse and neglect. It also notes that criminal victimization of the elderly is a unique phenomenon and the response to it should recognize the problem in its own terms rather than as part of the general crime configuration depicted in aggregate crime statistics.

This article presents the text of a speech delivered by Honorable Frank E. Moss, a U.S. Senator from the state of Utah. Today the principles of freedom and fair play are being challenged and opposed around the world by totalitarian ideology that denies the existence of God and subjects the individual to arbitrary naked power of the state. The greatest threat to the Rule of Law in any of the nations of our free world is the danger that the people will become dissatisfied with the functioning of their system of, justice and do irreparable injury to it, without realizing that by so doing they are destroying the very foundation of the Rule of Law in their society. It is our professional responsibility to keep the pulse of life beating strongly in the law. We cannot do this by treating our fundamental freedoms as abstract theoretical concepts of a legal system. The people of the free world must learn to believe those freedoms to be what we believe them to be, the practical dynamic concepts for living, unalienable in every human being. In earlier days the status of law in other nations Obviously, our system is under attack and tremendous pressure from without.

The article analyses U.S. laws as applicable to cases of reckless driving. The statutes found in the several states are unsatisfactory. All statutes are, and should be, aimed at a similar course of conduct--driving in a manner which is recognizable by a reasonable man as highly dangerous. But not one of the statutes in force specifically states this. The Uniform Act speaks in terms of "willfulness and wantonness," resulting in difficulties in determining what course of action is meant. The result is to force reliance on the tangled common law meaning of these words. The same interpretive problem is found in states following the "due circumspection" concept. The net result is that traffic officers cannot look to the statute to determine what offenses are there included. What is needed is a clearer statute drafted along the following lines: reckless driving is that driving which the ordinary driver can easily perceive will, under the circumstances, result in substantial danger to person or property, provided, however, that the danger must be to person or property other than that of the accused.

The article discusses the England and Wales Court of Appeal's decision in R. v. Meeking (Caroline), wherein a defendant was charged with manslaughter for committing the unlawful act of endangering road users, contrary to section 22 A (1)(b) of the Road Traffic Act 1988. It offers information that an appeal was made by a defendant against the conviction. It provides information that the appeal was dismissed by the Court and it was held an offence of negligence was created under the Act.

The Minnesota County Attorneys' Association held its annual conference in Saint Paul, on December 29 and 30, 1959. The host was Ramsey County Attorney William Randall. The program themes were Criminal Negligence and Trends in the Criminal Law. Participating in the program were Lyman Brink, Si Weisman, Godfrey Nelson, Dr. Harold Wright, Senator Harold Schultz, Professor Maynard Persig and others. Officers for 1959 in charge were President Einer C. Iversen, Vice-President Attell P. Felix, and Secretary-treasurer George M. Scott.