“The conventional view (of criminal law) regards it as exceptional, and as requiring special justification, for the criminal law to impose duties to assist other individuals. A. Ashworth, The Scope of Criminal Liability for Omissions (1989) To what extent does this statement reflect the law relating to criminal liability for omissions?”

An omission is basically a failure to act. A. Ashworth is trying to say that only under very special circumstances do the courts impose the duty for a person to act. This, imposing a duty by the courts is very rare. I do agree with what A. Ashworth is saying, however there are some exceptions to this. Some of these exceptions are statute based and come are based upon common law.

The general rule under criminal law is that there is no criminal liability for omitting unless the courts specifically impose a duty to act upon a person. Realistically, if we could be held liable for omitting, it could give rise to a number of issues. Would we be held liable for omitting, even if acting would have put ourselves at risk, or if it may just be a complete inconvenience for us. If we were under a duty to act, we would be trying to prevent crimes and rescue people on a never ending basis, which is…(short extract)