PART A BAR COURSE 2013 CRIMINAL LAW

PART A BAR COURSE 2013 CRIMINAL LAWSYLLABUSTopic 3: Homicide and the Fault RequirementsAims1. The principal fault elements of crimes: intention, knowledge, rashness,negligence2. The fault elements for homicide offencesMaterials1. Penal Code, ss. 299-304A2. Penal Code (Amendment) Act 20123. Road Traffic Act, s 664. YMC 2nd Ed, chaps 4, 8, 9, 105. State of Andhra Pradesh v Rayavarapu Punnayya AIR 1977 SC 45, YMC 2nd Edcasebook p. 976. Tham Kai Yau v PP [1977] 1 MLJ 174, YMC 2nd Ed casebook p. 1017. Tan Chee Wee v PP [2004] 1 SLR(R) 479, YMC 2nd Ed casebook p. 1048. Yeap Boon Hai v PP [2010] 2 MLJ 433, YMC 2nd Ed casebook p. 1079. PP v AFR [2011] 3 SLR 653, YMC 2nd Ed casebook p. 11010. Virsa Singh v State of Punjab AIR 1958 SC 465, YMC 2nd Ed casebook p. 12111. Ike Mohamed Yasin bin Hussin v PP [1974-1976] SLR(R) 596, YMC 2nd Edcasebook p. 12512. PP v Lim Poh Lye [2005] 4 SLR(R) 582, YMC 2nd Ed casebook p. 13613. Tan Cheng Eng v PP William [1968-1970] SLR(R) 761, YMC 2nd Ed casebook p.14114. Emperor v Dhirajia [1940] All 647, YMC 2nd Ed casebook p. 14315. PP v Teo Poh Leng [1991] 2 SLR(R) 541, YMC 2nd Ed casebook p. 14616. S Balakrishnan v PP [2005] 4 SLR(R) 249, YMC 2nd Ed casebook p. 15117. Lim Hong Eng v PP [2009] 3 SLR(R) 682, YMC 2nd Ed casebook p. 15418. Lim Poh Eng v PP [1999] 1 SLR(R) 428, YMC 2nd Ed casebook p. 15919. Seah Siak How v PP [1965] 1 MLJ 53, YMC 2nd Ed casebook p. 16520. Lim Chin Poh v PP [1968-1970] SLR(R) 483, YMC 2nd Ed casebook p. 16921. Ng Keng Yong v PP [2004] 4 SLR(R) 89, YMC 2nd Ed casebook p. 22Study questions1. What do you understand by the observation that “the fault elements of s 299,300 and 304A” of the Penal Code constitute a schematic approach towardscriminal responsibility”?2. Are the distinctions between the various clauses of ss 299 and 300 too fine?3. Describe the fault requirement for s. 300(c) Penal Code. Does this fit well withother provisions of s. 300?4. Have the problems in the interpretation of s. 300(c) Penal Code been solved bymaking the death penalty discretionary for this form of murder?5. According to the case law, what is the difference between a “rash” and a“negligent” act? Do you agree with the way this distinction is drawn?4