SQE1 · FLK2
Criminal Law
General principles, offences against the person, theft.
Actus reus, mens rea, homicide, offences against the person, sexual offences, theft and fraud, defences.
Criminal Law in SQE1 FLK2
Criminal Law in FLK2 is the substantive law of offences and defences, worked through the actus reus / mens rea framework. The marks reward methodical element-by-element analysis and accurate knowledge of the specific offence definitions.
What’s tested
- General principles: actus reus, mens rea, causation and the coincidence of the two
- Homicide: murder, voluntary manslaughter (loss of control and diminished responsibility) and involuntary manslaughter
- Non-fatal offences against the person under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and assault and battery
- Sexual offences under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and the question of consent
- Theft, robbery, burglary and fraud, and criminal damage
- Inchoate offences (attempt, conspiracy and encouraging or assisting) and parties to a crime
- General defences: self-defence, duress, intoxication, insanity and automatism
Leading cases to know
- R v Woollin — oblique intention and the foresight of virtual certainty
- R v Cunningham — recklessness as the awareness of a risk
- Ivey v Genting Casinos [2017] UKSC 67 — the current test for dishonesty (replacing R v Ghosh)
Key statutes and rules
- Offences Against the Person Act 1861 — ss.18, 20 and 47
- Theft Act 1968 — theft, robbery and burglary
- Fraud Act 2006 — the fraud offences
- Criminal Justice Act 2003 / Coroners and Justice Act 2009 — sentencing and the partial defences to murder
Common SBAQ traps
- Treating intention and recklessness as interchangeable when the offence requires a specific mens rea
- Missing a break in the chain of causation (a novus actus interveniens)
- Confusing the s.18 (with intent) and s.20 (without intent) offences under the 1861 Act
How to revise Criminal Law for FLK2
For every offence, learn the actus reus and mens rea elements as a paired definition, then practise applying them to a scenario one element at a time. Keep the defences as a checklist to run after you have established a prima facie offence.
Go deeper
Free revision notes — Criminal Law
Criminal Law in FLK2 covers the general principles of criminal liability (actus reus, mens rea, coincidence, causation) and the main offences: homicide, non-fatal offences against the person, sexual offences, theft, fraud, and defences. The SRA tests precise knowledge of offence elements and the leading cases.
General principles
Actus reus: the conduct, consequence, or circumstance element of the offence. Omissions: generally no liability, but exceptions where there is a duty to act (Miller [1983] — duty arising from the defendant's own prior act; Stone and Dobinson [1977] — duty arising from voluntary assumption of responsibility; Gibbins and Proctor [1918] — parental duty). Causation: factual (but-for test: White [1910]); legal (substantial and operative cause: Smith [1959]). Thin skull rule: Blaue [1975]. Mens rea: intention (Woollin [1999] — oblique intention where virtual certainty and foresight of virtual certainty), recklessness (Cunningham [1957] — subjective; R v G [2003] overruled Caldwell). Coincidence: continuing act doctrine (Fagan v MPC [1969]); series of acts (Thabo Meli [1954]).
Homicide
Murder: unlawful killing of a human being under the Queen's/King's peace with malice aforethought (intention to kill or cause GBH: R v Vickers [1957]; DPP v Smith [1961]). Voluntary manslaughter: murder with a partial defence — loss of control (Coroners and Justice Act 2009 s.54-56: qualifying trigger — D's fear of serious violence or things said or done constituting extremely grave circumstances and gave rise to a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged); diminished responsibility (s.52 CJA 2009: abnormality of mental functioning from recognised medical condition that substantially impaired D's ability to understand their conduct, form rational judgment, or exercise self-control). Involuntary manslaughter: gross negligence (Adomako [1994]); unlawful and dangerous act (DPP v Newbury [1977] — unlawful act + objective danger to any person).
Non-fatal offences and theft
Assault: Actus reus = apprehension of immediate unlawful force (Turbervell v Savage [1669]); Battery: application of unlawful force. ABH (s.47 OAPA 1861): assault/battery causing ABH (Brown v Paras [1992]); mens rea for the assault/battery is sufficient. GBH (s.20 OAPA 1861): inflicting GBH; mens rea = intention or recklessness as to some harm. S.18 OAPA: wounding/GBH with intent to do GBH. Theft Act 1968 s.1: dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with intention to permanently deprive. Appropriation = any assumption of the rights of an owner (Gomez [1993]; Hinks [2000] — can steal a gift). Dishonesty test: Ivey v Genting Casinos [2017] (objective test: were D's actions dishonest by the standards of ordinary decent people?).
Defences
Self-defence and prevention of crime (CJA 2008 s.76): force must be necessary and reasonable in the circumstances as D honestly believed them to be — honest but mistaken belief is sufficient (Williams [1984]). Insanity: M'Naghten Rules [1843] — disease of the mind causing a defect of reason such that D either did not know the nature and quality of their act or did not know it was wrong. Automatism: complete denial of actus reus — no voluntary act (Hill v Baxter [1958]). Duress: immediate threat of death or serious personal violence; cannot be used for murder (Hasan [2005] — threat must be imminent and operating). Consent: a complete defence to assault and battery; not available to murder or to offences where serious harm is deliberately inflicted (Brown [1994]).
Common pitfalls
- Applying the old Caldwell objective test for recklessness — this was overruled in R v G [2003]; subjective Cunningham recklessness is the standard.
- Confusing s.20 GBH (recklessness as to some harm) with s.18 GBH (intention to do GBH or to resist arrest) — they have very different mens rea requirements.
- Forgetting the Ivey test for dishonesty — Ghosh [1982] has been overruled and the defendant's own belief about whether their conduct was dishonest is no longer part of the test.
- Missing that duress cannot be used as a defence to murder — this is a firm rule from Hasan, and the SRA regularly tests it.
Exam tip
For any criminal law problem question, identify the offence(s), then work through: actus reus → mens rea → coincidence → causation → defences. Do not overlook accessorial liability (aiding, abetting, counselling, procuring — s.8 Accessories and Abettors Act 1861) when two or more defendants are in the scenario.
Bank size: 95 questions. We grow the bank weekly.
Criminal Law — frequently asked questions
What's tested in SQE1 Criminal Law?
Criminal Law (FLK2) covers the general principles of liability (actus reus, mens rea, causation and the coincidence of the two), homicide (murder and the voluntary and involuntary manslaughter routes), non-fatal offences against the person, sexual offences, theft, robbery, burglary and fraud, criminal damage, inchoate offences and parties, and the general defences.
What is the difference between actus reus and mens rea?
Actus reus is the physical element of an offence — the prohibited conduct, circumstances or consequences — while mens rea is the mental element, such as intention or recklessness. For most offences the prosecution must prove both, and that they coincided in time; some offences are ones of strict liability where no mens rea is required for at least one element.
Is SQE1 Criminal Law multiple choice?
Yes. Like the rest of SQE1, Criminal Law is assessed through single-best-answer questions: a client-based scenario followed by five options (A–E) from which you pick the single best answer. There is no negative marking, so it is always worth attempting every question.