This article considers the partial defence of loss of control and its use in current case law in England and Wales. The legislation in this arena was changed almost 16 years ago to better accommodate the most worthy cases, with particular focus on abuse victims who kill their abuser. With prior academic debate speculating that the partial defences were exploited and used out of context in gang-related violence and male-on-female aggression from infidelity, it is vital to discover if such unjust uses still prevail. This article additionally questions how Australian jurisdictions have solved this problem. Case law since the adoption of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 has been plentiful and provides a true picture of the current operation of this partial defence to murder, including judge-created loopholes. The article will offer novel solutions to the ongoing problems of access to justice, with a particular focus on abuse victims who kill and routes to allowing such victims to raise full and partial defences together without negating each other. The recommendations are based on an adaptation of self-defence, in a similar way to our accommodations for householders, with a new partial defence based on excessive force or self-preservation. This would allow both full and partial defences to run concurrently whilst avoiding the current problems of doing so, offering more opportunity for abuse victims becoming victims of the legal process and convicted of murder. This is significant; it will rid us of the ‘all-or-nothing’ approach relying only on self-defence offers.
Criminal justice system is not gender neutral. Female and male offenders are often differently treated. This research is aimed to study gender disparities in the construction of cases, the effect of gender in receiving an immediate custodial sentence and to explain whether disparities are legitimate or not. For this analysis, I used the samples of theft, robbery, driving, death and arson from the Crown Court Sentencing Survey (2011–2015). The biggest gender disparities were found in the outcome and mitigating factors. Male offenders received more immediate custody and female more suspended sentence and custody orders. The results shown that women were about half as likely to receive an immediate custody compared to men after controlling for age, type of offence, previous convictions, all aggravating and mitigating factors, and guilty plea. Although it could be a display of discrimination basis on gender, the obstacles faced by women in society must be considered.
This study provides an analysis of how extrajudicial mob actions, and the weaknesses of Pakistan's formal legal institutions reinforce one another in a vicious cycle, eroding public trust, and governance. Using a doctrinal research methodology, the study examines constitutional provisions, statutory laws, and case studies to identify structural flaws in Pakistan's legal system: a colonial legacy ill-suited to modern needs, parallel informal justice mechanisms (jirgas/panchayats) operating outside the law, endemic corruption and resource constraints in law enforcement, and ambiguous constitutional overlaps (e.g., between Islamic and secular law) that invite misuse. The converging and diverging insights from existing literature and theory, including the distinction between “thin” and “thick” conceptions of rule of law, are discussed to evaluate how procedural failures (thin rule of law) and substantive injustices (thick rule of law) collectively fuel mob violence culture. The analysis finds that mob violence both arises from and exacerbates legal system failures, creating a self-perpetuating cycle that undermines accountability and human rights. Breaking this cycle requires practical reforms, strengthening judicial capacity and independence, enforcing anti-mob violence laws with accountability, integrating informal justice into the formal framework, and rebuilding public confidence in state institutions. Only by addressing both the procedural shortcomings and substantive inequities in the justice system can Pakistan restore the rule of law and curb the scourge of mob violence.
There are current arguments in criminal-law literature for alternative approaches to causation to be used in English criminal law. The most recent proposal has come in the form of replacing the standard tests of causation with a single test, known as 'INUS' (or 'NS') causation - where a cause is a necessary part of a sufficient condition. This article discusses one of the potentially problematic implications of adopting the INUS account of causation in English criminal law. It analyses the consequences of INUS would have for strict liability result crimes involving injury or death by driving. It argues that INUS would affect the liability outcomes for these stigmatic offences so that instead of being acquitted, the defendant (D) would be criminally liable. However, such liability outcomes would yield fair-labelling concerns as they misrepresent the wrongfulness of D's conduct. This highlights the fair-labelling concerns with imposing strict liability in stigmatic offences more broadly. It concludes that the fair labelling issues in strict liability offences involving injury or death by driving could be addressed by importing a blameworthy requirement for the aggravated actus reus elements of the offences generally provided by D's careless driving. This would ensure that these offences appropriately capture the wrongdoing that they aim to target.
A commentary on the application of Fixed Penalty Notices during the COVID-19 pandemic under emergency powers in England, considering the failings therein in relation to the dissemination, or lack thereof, of consistent guidance information from legislators down to front-line law enforcement officers. This article is written for legislators of the future in an attempt to aid in preventing the confusion, inconsistent approach and undue criminalisation of members of the public experienced in England during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is the ultimate position of this article that an inherent problem existed in the policing of the pandemic and use of the regulations which started with the lack of guidance material published in tandem with the regulations to law enforcement officers and starts to form a proposal for change going forward.
The Sexual Offences Act 2003 extended the definition of rape to include oral penetration for the first time. This appears to be inconsistent with common understandings of sex and rape, and I submit that this mismatch between ordinary and statutory conceptions of rape undermines the principle of fair labelling and the aims of criminal justice, and likely contributes to attrition. I call for a new offence of non-consensual oral penetration - retaining the maximum life sentence but avoiding the word 'rape' - for assaults of this kind. I propose that this change would improve results for victims and perpetrators, and better reflect public perceptions. Categorising a sex offence as something other than rape may also make it easier to reach a conviction, but I argue that gender justice is not served by working towards increased convictions, which is neither a likely nor, perhaps, desirable outcome of feminist law reform.
This article examines the trafficking of women through a restorative justice lens, using a case study from China, to explore the complex realities of human trafficking for forced marriage. It analyses how current criminal justice policies and practices address this longstanding social ill, the search for innovative responses alongside conventional legal interventions, and the structural and ideological constraints that limit the development of restorative justice practices. The findings reveal that, while trafficking in women remains a persistent issue, official responses beyond the criminal justice system remain limited. Recent policy trends emphasising a balance between leniency and severity have not displaced the predominance of punitive approaches. While restorative programmes are readily applied to juvenile offenders, minor infractions or 'victimless' offences, their extension to serious and sensitive crimes - such as trafficking in women which carries harsh penalties, including capital punishment - is highly restricted. Drawing on insights from a jurisdiction where justice models are profoundly shaped by distinctive political, cultural and institutional nuances, the article contributes to scholarly debates at the intersection of human trafficking, gender-based violence and restorative justice.
