Foundations of Criminal Law-resit journal article analysis
Corporate Acceptable Use Policy
February 14, 2024Critically analyse the arguments for and against the codification of Scottish criminal law
February 14, 2024Foundations of Criminal Law-resit journal article analysis
Instructions:
N.P. Metcalfe and A.J. Ashworth, in their case commentary, Arson: mens rea – recklessness whether property destroyed or damaged’ (2004) Crim L R 369, analyse and critically evaluate the decisions of the House of Lords in R v G [2003] UKHL 50; [2004] 1 A.C. 1034 and R. v Caldwell (James) [1982] A.C. 341.
Briefly identify the key arguments advanced in the case commentary and, giving reasons, discuss whether Metcalfe and Ashworth’s critical evaluation of the two decisions is persuasively argued.
NB. You are only required to discuss the Commentary (which starts at page 370 with the words “It is a great tribute to…”) and NOT the preceding case summary.
The case commentary is accessible via Westlaw: go to the library website and search for ‘Westlaw’ in the search box and follow the links to the Westlaw site. When in Westlaw click on Journals along top menu. Then enter ‘arson’ in subject/keyword box and Metcalfe and Ashworth in author box and enter.
Word Limit: 1000 words (excluding indented quotations of more than 50 words, bibliography and other items listed in rule 6.60 of the Academic Regulations.