Criminal Law Assignment: Bernice, Riyad, and Guy's Liability Analysis

This criminal law assignment analyzes three distinct scenarios to determine criminal liability under UK law. The first scenario involves Bernice, who leaves a restaurant without paying, leading to a discussion of theft, fraud, and the concept of dishonesty as defined by the Fraud Act 2006 and Theft Act 1968, referencing the Ivey v Genting Casinos case. The second scenario examines the criminal liability of Riyad and Guy in a case involving sexual assault and intoxication. It covers issues of consent and the relevant legislation. The assignment explores actus reus and mens rea, alongside the Consumer Rights Act 2015. The document emphasizes the importance of understanding these legal concepts and applying them to real-world situations. The assignment also discusses the legal definitions of dishonesty and fraud in the context of the cases presented.

Criminal Law

Table of Contents
MAIN BODY ..................................................................................................................................3
TASK ..............................................................................................................................................3
Question 1:..................................................................................................................................3
Answer b. ...................................................................................................................................5
Question 2: .................................................................................................................................7
Question 4: ...............................................................................................................................11
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................16

MAIN BODY
TASK
Question 1:
Answer a).Consider the criminal liability of Bernice.
From the following case where Bernice goes to a restaurant and orders meal and wine. The
situation then leads to Bernice drinking her wine and complaining about the food as
undercooked. As soon as the waiter goes to change the dish, Bernice leaves the restaurant
without paying. Bernice has previously been in debt as her boyfriend Adam left their rented
apartment and she was not able to pay the whole rent.
The situation where Bernice leaves without paying at the restaurant imposes criminal liability on
Bernice due to non payment of the bill at the restaurant.
Criminal liability means the liability of a person that is legally imposed due to the legal
obligations. In this a person is personally responsible for breaking the law and is held liable for
it. This criminal liability refers to the charges imposed that determines the criminal liability of a
person. These charges can be in the form of punishments, fines or compensation to be beard by a
person(Virgo, 2018). The elements that constitutes the criminal liability are criminal mind ie
mens rea, criminal act and intention to cause harm to any individual, society or organisation. The
damage that is caused to a individual, society or organisation due to the criminal behaviour of a
person constitutes criminal liability.
This situation of Bernice leaving the restaurant without paying the bill constitutes the offence of
theft. The criminal offence of theft can be proved by mischievous intention of the person in order
to dishonestly leave without paying the bill. If a person do not pay after ordering and leaves the
restaurant, then it is considered as stealing and under which a person can be legally liable. The
act of non payment is generally considered as a breach of contract between the restaurant and
diners. If a person enters a restaurant and orders food then he is liable under a contract. This is a
type of agreement between the restaurant and customer. This agreement under contractual
obligation obligates a person to make the payment after completing his meal at restaurant. A
restaurant is obligated to provide safe and healthy food to its customers with affordable services

and prices(Bokovnya, Khisamova and Begishev, 2019). A customer is obligated to make the
payment of such meals and services beard by him. The diners at a restaurant are obligated to pay
if they acquire or order something at it. If a person leaves without paying the bill at a restaurant
then it is considered as a way of acting dishonestly.
The condition of inability to pay also arises frequently when a customer forgets to make the
payment by forgetting his wallet at home. The technical issues in online payment with decline of
card payment also enables a customer to not pay the bill. In order to avoid such issues, a person
must always carry some cash and have some other modes of payment( (Casson, 2019). There
should be the procedure of half payment made before hand after the placement of order so that
less to less problem is caused between the customers and restaurant owners. There is also the
implication of other services taken like taking something of value from the customers. Some
restaurants compensate the bills from the customers by enforcing some of services of restaurants
in order to bear their loss. There is also the policy of taking whole information from the
customers which binds them to make the payment. In this situation if a customers leaves without
making the payment, then the restaurant owners can reach out to him by accessing his
information.
The refusal to pay amounts to theft which is a criminal offence. A person is guilty of constituting
theft if he has dishonestly used the property or belonging of another person with the intention to
deceive the other person or organisation. So, the non payment of charge which was to be beard
by Bernice adheres her to commit the offence of theft. If a person leaves a restaurant without
making any payment and has the intention to purposely conduct the mischievous act then he ha
done the act of fraud by fraudulently deceiving the authorities of restaurant. There is also a
situation where if a customer is not satisfied with the food then they refuse to make the payment.
Whenever the customers are not satisfied with the food then they refuse to make the payment
which creates conflicts between the customer and owner of restaurant.
According to the Consumers Rights Act 2015, if a customer is not satisfied with the food then
there can ask for compensation which can be in the form of reduction of price or the policy of
refund. The customers can also get the refund of the whole money paid if they are not satisfied
with the food or service of the restaurant. The customers are entitled to get safe and healthy food
which should be prioritised by the restaurant owners (Clibborn and Wright, 2018). The
authorities of restaurant should conduct or perform their services due care and diligence in order

to avoid conflict with the customers. There are various rights and remedies available to a
customer if he receives bad or poor services from an organisation. The staff or management
department of dining should be informed about the service of bad food, which can be improved
by them in future. The satisfaction of the customers should be of utmost priority for the
management of restaurant. If there is any defect in the food in relation to spoiled, uncooked or
overcooked food then a customer can ask for improved food or services. This leads to the
situation of co operation between the customers and staff of restaurant which should allow the
situation of negotiation between them (Khilyuta, 2020). This can lead to solving the matter at
first instance only with update in improvement in the quality of food and services.
If there are chances of becoming ill or infected with consumption of food or drinks then a
customer can institute suit against the respective authorities of restaurant with the aid of
compensation.
A person is said to act dishonestly if he refuses to pay for the services that is enjoyed by him in
consideration with payment of services. Therefore, if a person avoids to make payment in
exchange of services beard then is considered as an act of dishonestly. This dishonest act comes
under the Fraud Act 2006.
Section 11 of the Fraud Act 2006 signifies that if a defendant endures services for himself or
another person in a dishonest way then it constitutes the offence of fraud. If a person has
knowledge that services beard by him are to charged by payment of such services and even then
he avoids making payment of it, then he is liable under Fraud Act 2006.
Section 2 of Theft Act 1968 explains Dishonestly as deprivation of a right in order to misuse the
property with the intention of non payment for the usage of property.
If a person leaves a restaurant without making any payment then it is considered as the act of
Dine and Dash. The act of Dine and Dash refers to the condition where a person eats or drinks in
a restaurant or bar and leaves without paying the bill. This situation leads the owners of
restaurant to bear the liability of the culprits and have to pay from their own pocket for the
service of dining. If the person is caught by the authorities with the act of Dine and Dash then he
has to pay a fine of 5000 dollars or even bear imprisonment.
Answer b.
The law of United Kingdom contains a concept named dishonesty meaning any act which is
done without any element of honesty. This refers to any act of deception, cheating, hiding any

information the disclosure of which is necessitated by the circumstances or anything done with
corruption, knavish ness, lying or treacherousness (Pittman and Barker, 2020). The definitions of
dishonesty has been changed with time and is a constantly debatable one. The views which
attributed to this controversy of definition were two- one which related to the series of acts and
the other which associated the term to the state of mind. The state of mind attribute contained a
two stage test as was evolved under the case of R v. Ghosh, the elements of mens rea were
concerned. The concept of dishonesty in English law is two fold with variation in civil and
criminal views for the same. The civil law follows that the objectivity is to be concerned
whenever dishonesty forms part of the civil law and none of the test is to be applied to consider
the facts contained under it. The law applicable shall not contain the consideration of any state of
mind neither the ways to followed should be considered on subjective tests.
The law regarding the definition followed was contained in the Theft Act 1968 which clearly
defined dishonesty. The definition contained here is just one and is to be applied to every such
offence in substance without any variation. The definition here is exclusive leaving the contents
open for the consideration of jury as to what forms part of dishonesty. The dishonesty is not
formed when any person does anything on the believe of the thing being justified by law, under
the believe of having consent for the same or that after due steps for the discovery of the same
the owner of the property cannot be found. The appropriation of the other persons property will
be dishonestly done notwithstanding the will to pay for the property misappropriated.
The position of the term dishonestly or the definition of the same effectually changed after the
judgement of Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crockfords [2017] UKSC 67. now the
subjective test as was put forward by the previous Ghosh's case is considerably overruled . Only
the defendants knowledge or genuinely believed facts by the defendant is to be considered by the
jury and the rest of the older test is not be considered at all while assessing what forms the
subject of dishonesty (Ryder, 2018). The new test formed here is that what is assessment based
on the standards set on the thinking of ordinary decent people shall be considered. The test laid
down under this case applies to whole jurisdiction of authorities including both the civil and
criminal cases. Thus it can be clearly understood that the position regarding the contents and
definition of the term dishonestly considerably changes after this case and shows crucial
improvement in the previous laws regarding the law of UK on dishonesty.

Question 2:
Consider the criminal liability of Riyad and Guy.
Answer
Fact in Issue
In the given situation, the offences committed by the Riyad against the Carolina will make him
liable under criminal law for committing offences against the person. He was forcibly sex with
her and intoxicate her with the soft drink . The situation given in the case, clearly showing that
consent was not freely made by the Carolina and were forced by the Riyad to sex with her and
she had given the consent just to save her sister from sexual offence. It is showing that offence
was committed against person and Carolina is the victim of sexual act committed before
marriage.
Legislation
The UK criminal law provides rules and responsibilities for the protection of their citizen against
the criminal offences. It provides wide range of protection to the individual against criminal act
or omission. It defines rules and procedure to investigate the criminal case and provide
punishment to the wrong doer. The crime is defined as the criminal act with criminal intention
jointly make person liable under criminal law (Aborisade and Oni, 2020). The essential element
of crime are actus rea and mens rea. The legislative body plays significant role in identifying
various criminal act committed in a society and provides the safety and protection to its citizen.
The Criminal Law covers following aspect which includes:
 Offence against person
 Offences against Property
 Statutory crimes
 Financial crimes
However, the International Convention also plays crucial role in order to secure the rights of the
individual to protect the life of the individual against the criminal act. According to Universal
Declaration of Human right (UDHR) , the right of the individual are important and it is their
fundamental right to live in safe and healthy environment , free from crimes and offences. The
right to live with personal dignity is the core element that are provided by various International

Convention and Treaty to protect the law and its citizen. The legislative framework are playing
key function to enact the important legislation to provide penal laws and punish the offenders.
Application
According to clause 6 (1) of the Criminal Law Bill, defines the sexual assault and liability will
impose if :
 person intentionally applies physical force in order to cause bodily harm;
 without the consent of the other person,
 an act is done to cause injury or loss.
Consent of a victim is carefully examined to apply criminal liability on the accused. The
definition of word “consent” is defined under Sexual Offence legislation of 2003 , as if she
agrees by choice , freedom or willingly making. But, the consent given by the Carolina is not
free and received by giving her fear and inducement (Baumeister, 2019). In this case, the Court
will determine the test of reasonable belief to identify the circumstances whether the consent
element was there or not. There is another provision dealing with the consent which is given to
protect from serious harm According to section 71 of the Domestic Abuse Act, 2021 , the Riyad
has given the infliction of harm to the Carolina to achieve the sexual gratification.
Further the court will apply evidential presumption to evaluate the element of consent. The
defendant does the sexual act and forced her to do sexual penetration . As per section 75(2) of
the Sexual offences Act, 2002 defines certain situation where consent is forcibly taken:
 Fear of Harm
 Unlawfully detain
 Asleep and Unconscious
 Physical disability.
She has forced, manipulated and scared to form abusive relationship and defendant has formed
the fear for her well being to make a choice for the sex before marriage. He also pour something
into drink to intoxicate her.
It is clear which is serious act in the criminal law and liability is imposed on the defendant. The
United Nation Convention rectified the legislation to secure the rights of the Women and
children against the sexual offence. These sexual crimes are common nowadays. Also, the
Protection form Harassment law of 1997 provides legislative framework to punish the offenders
to harass another person physical and cause sexual assault with them at public places.

According to the religious belief of Carolina, the sex before marriage is not allowed. She
assumed that Riyad is the famous football player and eager to meet with her (Cockburn, 2020).
The act committed by him is shocking for the Carolina and he is threatening her sister to forcibly
accept the consent of her to perform sexual act. These kinds of offences are not morally wrong
but also against the human right of the individual as it threatens the life and security of a person.
In England and Wales, the sexual act without consent is termed as sexual activity committed
against person. The guidelines has been made to sentencing for offences according to the
different categories of offences. The UK criminal legal system mainly focus on ensuring the
gender equality and empower the social justice in the country. The law has been made to protect
the nation form sexual harm and offences against person to reduce the crime against child and
women. The constituent body is responsible to enforce the available rights and impose
punishment on the wrongdoer. The criminal legal justice system recognised the devastating
crimes that has greater impact on the victim's life and it ensure effective procedural system to
conduct investigation in order to prosecute the criminal. The increase in number of sexual cases,
domestic case, violence against women , girls badly impact the society (Deb, Sunny and
Majumdar, 2020). The citizens have full faith on the justice system and they approach the court
to exercise their right. It is the duty of the judiciary to provide them fair, reasonable trial
procedure to make them satisfy with their judgments. In deciding over the issues of sexual
intercourse the consent of the victim plays an important role. The consent shall be so in the
reasonable belief and it should continuing since its inception till the continuance of the
intercourse. Any consent which is taken by threat is no consent as per section 74 of the Sexual
Offences Act in UK. The communication of the fact of not consenting is not necessary when the
defendant himself knows that the threat is inflicted on the victim to gain the consent of her. In
the case of R v Malone[1998] 2 Cr App R 447, the requirement in law is jut that the evidences
as to lack of consent is to be put forward to the jury and that the circumstances of the case
clarified the threat which was inflicted. The evidences may include the drug or any drink has
been given to her which made her incapable of giving consent. In the present case the Riyad
threatened her with the words of compelling her sister to have intercourse with him. She
consented in response tot he threat and did not wanted to have the intercourse by will.
The consent and the penetration shall be the continuing act. As in the case of R v Jheeta[2007]
EWCA Crim 1699, the jury held that the defendant threatened the victim in having frequent

sexual intercourses than she would have not had with him if the case was not that of threats. In
the present case to Riyad did same by calling the sister of victim and threatening her to have
continual of the act and no information to the police shall be given by her or her sister.
While considering the liability of Guy, it can be conclusively said that he was liable for
robbery. The force and the threat of stabbing the knife was inflicted by him over Riyad.
According to section 8 of the Theft legislation of 1968 defines the term theft as it refers to use of
force and threat on another person. The intention of the person will be determined to identify
robbery and if the person is causing harm or bodily injury to the will be guilty of an act of
robbery. This is mainly committed against the property to dishonestly cause loss and harm to the
property of a person (Elliott, 2019). The Act further defines the essential element of robbery to
make person liable for the criminal act, it includes:
 There must have dishonest intention of a person. (Section 1).
 The accused use the force just after stealing the property. (Section 2)
 Escape of the property made by the accused.
 The Victim must have suffered some loss.
According to the UK criminal law, the punishment of robbery is defined as life imprisonment.
Therefore, the Guy will be held liable for causing robbery with the Riyad by stealing his
expensive watch.
The legal guidelines has been laid down by the UK government to put charges on the accused
for dishonest act of a person. The guidelines defines the theft Act of 1978 and Crimes Act of
2002 both are dealing with the same subject master of the theft. The Criminal Justice Act of
1993 identifies the general offences and consider the essential elements to put liability on the
wrongdoer. In order to cause rubbery the, person must have steal physical property of a person to
cause damage and harm to the owner of that property (Ferrao, 2018). Therefore, the guilty act
combines with the guilty mind of a person will make the person liable under the Criminal law.
The International Convention are actively take part in providing peace and security to their
civilians. They has laid down certain rules and principles that are obligation on its citizens to
comply with it. The main objective of enforcing law is to maintain security in the community
and reduce the crime rates in order to achieve growth and development of the country. These
laws are focused to provide assistance to the general public and reduce the risk in the society.

In the case of R v Dawson and James[1976] 64 Cr App R 150, the man was nudged by one of
the defendants so that the other may take the wallet from his pocket and this was considered as a
clear case of robbery . The contention here was no force was used by any of the offenders. The
conviction were upheld by the jury as the use of force was merely a objective requirement and it
is left at the assessment by jury as to whether the act in whole constitutes to be the offence or
not. Even if no force have been used by the Guy the act would have been termed to robbery as
after stealing he punched just because he did not like Riyad to play for the team he did not liked.
It was clearly held in the case of R v Clouden[1987] Crim LR 56, and thus the liability of Guy is
clearly ascertained by the act of him. The law in UK does not protect the person from liability in
the absence of force also (SAYAPIN, 2021). Therefore, the enforcement bodies are the deciding
body aims to ensure the justice to secure the legal and fundamental right of the citizens.
Question 4:
Consider the criminal liability of Ari.
Answer
Facts in Issue-
There are two men who worked in a factory. These two-man names are the Ari and the
Vlad. Ari is very short in Hight due to which the staff members of eth factory used to tease him
on the regular basis. They teased Vlad very mercilessly while telling him that he is a child. The
most of the bullies to Ari was done by the Vlad. Moreover, as a result of these bullies Ari started
to drink alcohol on the regular basis. So, when Ari does not drink, he uses to remain anxious in
nature and when he drink he become irritable. On day Vlad took his daughter to the theatre of the
Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. At the theatre, he showed the pictures of the staff members
to his daughter where he did bully badly to Ari. He bullied him by saying that you must find a
partner in the school of your short size. After hearing this comment, Ari becomes anxious and
went to his locker and drank whisky. Moreover, when he came back he attacked on the Vlad by
the metal rod that is being used in the factory. Due, to the attack, there was a very loss of blood
to Vlad and the blood group of Vlad was also very rare. He was stopped by the Howie by doing
this act but he didn't stop. Vlad was severely injured on his head by Ari. Furthermore, when

he was sent to hospital, Vlad dies due to loss of blood without even coming back to
consciousness once. Ari told police that he did so because of the defamation and insults that is
done by the Vlad on him on the regular basis.
Legislation-
The murder is the intentional act that is being done by an individual. In murder, a person
kills the other human being by the any of the means. The means may include the dangerous
weapon such as sharp knife, gun, iron rod, etc. which can be used to kill a person. Generally, the
murder is a preplanner act that is done by the criminal who has committed the act of the murder.
The murder is described under the common law of the UK (Bows and Herring, 2020). There is
no specific provision under which the murder is dealt in the country. The legislation that would
deal in this case is the Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965 and the Criminal Justice
Act 2003.
Applicability-
The act of the murder requires the actus rues and the men’s rea. The term actus rea means
that there must be some action that is to be done by the criminal to commit the act of the murder.
This means that the actual killing of the individual must be present in the case. Moreover, only
the imaginary thinking in the mind that someone has killed some other person would not result to
the murder as per the law of the country (Cunningham, et.al, 2018). The second element is the
men’s rea which means the guilty intention to commit a crime of murder as per the law of the
country. This is because there are various cases where the is no such intention to kill a person in
the mind of the people, but in spite of that the other person die due to some other reason. This
can be seen in the cases of the surgical operations that is to be done by the doctors. So, it would
not result to the murder. Hence, both these elements of the murder must be present in the case to
take it as the case of the murder. Moreover, there are also various cases that would explain the
concept of murder. There must be the presence of the grievously body harm to the other person
of the case. Moreover, the actus rues exclude the baby that is in the worm of the mother. In
addition to this, if the person does due to any disease that is suffered by him would not result to
the murder. So, there are the cases of the culpable homicide to the individuals as per the law of
the country (Gupta, 2020).