Miller | Criminal Law Case | Law Teacher

Modified: 16th Jul 2019
Wordcount: 135 words

Disclaimer: This is an example of a student written case summary. If you want to create an essay on any question or title, try out our AI Law Essay Writer.

Cite This

Miller Case

HOUSE OF LORDS 

LORD DIPLOCK, LORD KEITH OF KINKEL, LORD BRIDGE OF HARWICH, LORD BRANDON

OF OAKBROOK AND LORD BRIGHTMAN 

16 FEBRUARY, 17 MARCH 1983

The actus reus of the offence of arson, contrary to s 1(1) and (3)a of the Criminal Damage Act 1971, is present if the defendant

accidentally starts a fire and thereafter, intending to destroy or

damage property belonging to another or being reckless whether any such

property would be destroyed or damaged, fails to take any steps to

extinguish the fire or prevent damage to such property by that fire (see

p 981 d to f, p 982 f to j, and p 983 j to p 984 b, post). 

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Generate a new AI Essay from this title with Nomikos AI

  • Free to use
  • Takes under 2 minutes
  • No registration required
  • 2:1 level work

Suggest 3 More Related Essay Titles with Nomikos AI

  • 2:1 academic standard titles
  • Instant suggestions
  • No registration required

Get Academic Help Today!

Encrypted with a 256-bit secure payment provider