The general rule is that the criminal law prohibits doing harm, but there is no liability under the criminal law for omissions. In English and Welsh criminal law there are certain exceptions to this rule if there is a duty to act, such a duty may arise in a number of ways for a person, and failure to do so may result in criminal liability. The duty to act is an onerous burden that is imposed by law only in a narrow range of circumstances, generally requiring action in situations where inaction would be unreasonable. For example, section 170(4) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 requires a driver involved in an accident to report it to the police or provide their contact details to other parties involved. The arguments for and against will be critically examined during this essay to conclude that there is no place for an easy duty of rescue in English and Welsh criminal law. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essayIn English and Welsh criminal law, there is generally no legal duty to rescue a person in peril. Liability for inaction only arises when a legal obligation to act is recognized. Examples are given as follows: The parties involved have a special relationship which creates a duty of care between them, for example between parents and child; the person concerned is the one who creates a harmful situation; The person has a contractual obligation to save, for example, a level crossing guard on duty; The person who has voluntarily assumed responsibility for others; or the duty to act is explicitly specified in law, for example, a woman should not voluntarily omit her baby to avoid causing the death of her child. This common law duty to act was established because it is believed that the coercive powers of the law should only be invoked in response to positive actions, otherwise the law would become too burdensome and infringe on individual liberty. Furthermore, liability for omissions gives rise to the possibility of numerous liabilities where there is no particular reason to attribute liability to one person over another. Additionally, most violations are not so serious that criminalization is necessary. In certain countries such as France, which practice a civil law system, it is however stipulated that anyone will be punished with a prison sentence if someone "voluntarily refrains from providing such assistance to a person in danger as she could have provided him without risk to herself or to third parties through her personal action or by calling for help. » In the German legal system, there is a provision which also states "that a citizen is obliged to provide assistance in the event of an accident or general danger if necessary." Keep in mind: this is just a sample. Get a personalized document from our expert writers now. I support the current law in the UK that a person should only be criminally liable if it involves a duty of care. As jurist Glanville Williams said, "The word crime is expressed with the implications of the action; it is a violation of the principle of legality to convict people of criminal acts when they have no acted, and it is unfair to condemn people who do not commit such acts. acts under the name of actors”. If we followed German practice, people would help out of fear of being prosecuted. The law then assumes the role of forcing people to act instead of prohibiting undesirable acts,..