1. R vs MILLER, 1983
PRESENTED BY - MIHIKA DUBEY
B.A LLB 3RD SEMESTER
GUIDED BY - PROFF. APOORVA SINGH
2. FACTS OF THE CASE
The defendant was a vagrant who had spent the evening drinking before
returning to the property where he was squatting. He fell asleep with a lit
cigarette in his hand, which started a fire. The defendant woke and, seeing
the fire, took no steps to extinguish it but simply moved to sleep in a different
room. Eventually the whole house caught fire, causing over £800 worth of
damage. The defendant was charged with arson.
3. ISSUE BEFORE THE COURT
Because the prosecution relied on the ground that the
defendant had failed to take any action to extinguish the fire in
addition to the fact that he had been reckless in starting the fire
by falling asleep with a lit cigarette, the question arose whether
the defendant could be liable for an omission. If it was not, then
the actus reus of arson was not present and no conviction for
arson would be possible
4. JUDGEMENT
The court concluded that as he was responsible for having created
the dangerous situation, the defendant was under a duty to take
action to resolve it once he became aware of the fire.
It was not necessary that the defendant was subjectively aware of
the risk of damage posed by the fire, provided that this would be
obvious to a reasonable person who troubled to turn his mind to the
matter.
The defendant was therefore liable for his omission to take any
steps to put out the fire or seek held, and was accordingly convicted
of arson.
