Judgement for the case R v Fagan
Table Of Contents
A man ran his car on to a policeman’s foot accidentally, but when asked to move refused to do so.
The defence argument was that mens rea and actus reus did not coincide and therefore there was no crime. However the court said that Fagan’s actions constituted a continuous action.
Intent can be superimposed onto a guilty act. Fagan undertook actions so as to prolong the policeman’s pian (turning off the ignition, holding the wheel in position on the policeman’s foot, saying words that indicated reluctance to move etc) which cannot be regarded as mere inactivity.
For Further Study on R v Fagan
Criminal Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambrid...
Need instant answers? Our AI exam tutor is here to help.
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get StartedRelated Product Samples
These product samples contain the same concepts we cover in this case.
| Criminal Law | Homicide Notes (20 pages) |
| Criminal Law | Mens Rea — Intention Recklessness And Negligence Notes (24 pages) |
| Criminal Law | Problem Questions Notes (38 pages) |
Criminal Law notes fully updated for recent exams at Oxford and Cambrid...
Since 2010, Oxbridge Notes has been a trusted education marketplace, supplying high-quality materials from top achievers at universities like Oxford, Cambridge, LSE, Harvard, and Yale.