Jump to content

R v Pittwood

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2a02:c7f:98c5:ec00:c441:a212:562a:6373 (talk) at 09:26, 27 October 2020 (changed from American to British English to reflect subject of page). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

R v Pittwood
CourtCrown Court / Assizes
Full case nameRegina v. Pittwood
Citation(s)[1902] TLR 37
Court membership
Judge(s) sittingJury trial presided by Mr Justice Wright
Case opinions
Depending on the facts, such as the contract in this case, there is a duty to act in the criminal law to save others from physical harm, including in the law of manslaughter.
Keywords
  • manslaughter
  • omission
  • failure in duty to act to save others from physical harm

R v Pittwood [1902] is a case in English criminal law as to omission, specifically the duty to act to save others from physical harm, finding an omission that amounted to manslaughter.[1][2]

Facts

Railway crossing keeper, Pittwood, failed in his duty (by contract owed to his employer) to close a level crossing gate, leading to the death of a wagon driver after a train crashed into his horse and cart.[2]

Judgment

He was found guilty of manslaughter.[3]

Mr Justice Wright ruled that depending on the facts, such as the contract in this case, there is a duty to act in the criminal law to save others from physical harm, including in the law of manslaughter.[2]

References

  1. ^ Halsbury's Laws of England, volume 25: "Circumstances", paragraph 6 (5th edition)
  2. ^ a b c Card, Cross and Jones: Criminal Law 16th Ed., Prof. Richard Card (ed.), Reed Elsevier (printed by CPI Bath, Bath, UK), 2004. at 2.10 (p. 60)
  3. ^ Hails, F. G. (June 1966). "Manslaughter". Police Journal. 39 (6): 306.  – via HeinOnline (subscription required)