DPP v Newbury & Jones [1977] AC 500

Facts

  • Two teenage defendants, Newbury and Jones, pushed a paving stone from a bridge onto a passing train, resulting in the death of the train guard.
  • The defendants were charged with constructive (unlawful act) manslaughter.
  • The prosecution’s case centered on whether the defendants could be found liable without proof they had foreseen the risk of harm from their act.

Issues

  1. Whether constructive manslaughter requires that the defendant foresaw a risk of harm from their unlawful act.
  2. Whether the test for dangerousness in unlawful act manslaughter is objective or subjective.
  3. Whether the defendants' intention to commit the initial unlawful act, without foresight of harm, suffices for liability.

Decision

  • The House of Lords held that the test for dangerousness in constructive manslaughter is objective.
  • It was confirmed that it is unnecessary for the prosecution to prove the defendants foresaw the risk of harm.
  • The court determined that liability for manslaughter attaches if a reasonable person would recognize that the unlawful act posed some risk of harm.
  • The “reasonable person” test was applied, and the defendants were found guilty of manslaughter.

Legal Principles

  • Constructive manslaughter requires an unlawful, intentional act that is also dangerous, as determined by the standard of a sober and reasonable person.
  • The dangerousness of the act is measured objectively, not by the defendant's subjective appreciation of risk.
  • Foresight of harm by the defendant is not an element of the offense; what matters is objective foreseeability of harm by a reasonable person.
  • The act must directly and significantly contribute to the victim’s death, establishing a causal link.
  • The intent required is to commit the core unlawful act, not to cause harm or death.

Conclusion

The decision in DPP v Newbury & Jones established that the test for dangerousness in unlawful act manslaughter is objective, removing the need for the defendant’s subjective foresight of harm. Liability is based on whether a reasonable person would have recognized the risk present in the unlawful act. This ruling forms a central element of the legal framework governing constructive manslaughter in English law.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal