CRIMINAL LAW MOOTING - MOOT PROFORMA
CRIMINAL LAW MOOTING - MOOT PROFORMA
IN THE .....BETWEENR
Respondent
-And-
Appellant
SKELETON ARGUMENT
ON BEHALF OF THE SENIOR/JUNIOR COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT/RESPONDENT*
Name:
Student Number:
Moot judge:
First ground of appeal:
The cause of Smiths death was not the stab wound, which was not life threatening. The immediate cause of Smiths death was the removal of Smith from life support, consequent to Smith being subjected to inadequate emergency medical treatment. Both negligent medical treatment and removal from life support were intervening acts between the injury and Smiths conventional death.
(For the appellant)
The injury inflicted by Jones on Smith was a substantial and operative cause of death. It did not need to be the sole cause. Negligent medical treatment, even as a contributory factor, does not relieve the defendant of liability. As such, Jones is not relieved of criminal liability for Smiths death.
(For the respondent)
Submission(s)* on the first ground of appeal:
Authorities: (TO A MAXIMUM OF THREE)
(list your Acts (including relevant sections), cases and other authorities here)
1.
2.
3.
Second ground of appeal:
Smith voluntarily chose to bring about his death when he refused to seek medical treatment. This voluntary act breaks the chain of causation between the injury inflicted by Jones, and Smiths death.
(For the appellant)
The law is concerned with the consequences of the defendants wrongdoing and not with the victims response to the injury. As such, Jones is not relieved of criminal liability for Smiths death
(For the respondent)Submission(s)* on the second ground of appeal:
Authorities: (TO A MAXIMUM OF THREE)
(list your Acts (including relevant sections), cases and other authorities here)
1.
2.
3.
Your submission(s) should not exceed 1,500 words
* Amend as appropriate
