📚 Year 11 WJEC Law: Formula & Principle Quick Reference | Year 11 WJEC 法律：公式定理速查手册
This quick reference handbook is designed for Year 11 WJEC Law students to memorise essential legal ‘formulas’ and principles. It breaks down criminal, tort, and contract law into simple equations and checklists, helping you apply the law to exam scenarios with confidence.
这本速查手册专为 Year 11 WJEC 法律学生设计，帮助记忆核心法律“公式”与原则。它将刑法、侵权法和合同法分解为简单的等式和核查清单，让你自信地将法律应用于考试情景。
1. The Crime Equation | 犯罪公式
CRIMINAL LIABILITY = ACTUS REUS + MENS REA – DEFENCE
A person is guilty of a crime only when the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant committed a guilty act (actus reus) with a guilty mind (mens rea) and had no valid defence. If any element is missing, the defendant must be acquitted.
只有在控方排除合理怀疑地证明被告人实施了有罪行为（犯罪行为）并具有有罪心理（犯罪意图）且没有有效辩护的情况下，一个人才能被定罪。缺少任一要素，被告人必须被宣告无罪。
The actus reus can be a positive act, an omission where there is a duty to act, or a state of affairs. The mens rea must coincide in time with the actus reus for the crime to be complete.
犯罪行为可以是积极作为、负有作为义务的不作为，或状态性犯罪。犯罪意图必须与犯罪行为在时间上同时发生，犯罪才成立。
2. Actus Reus: The Guilty Act | 犯罪行为：有罪行为
Actus reus must be voluntary. If a person acts involuntarily due to a reflex, muscle spasm, or is physically forced, they have not committed the actus reus. In Hill v Baxter, a driver who lost control because of a swarm of bees was not acting voluntarily.
犯罪行为必须是自愿的。如果一个人因反射、肌肉痉挛或被身体强制而不自愿地行动，就不构成犯罪行为。在 Hill v Baxter 案中，因蜂群袭击而失控的司机并非自愿行为。
Omissions can form actus reus only if a legal duty to act exists. Duties arise from statute, contract, a special relationship (parent-child), voluntary assumption of care, or creation of a dangerous situation (R v Miller).
不作为只有在存在法律上的作为义务时才能构成犯罪行为。义务来源于制定法、合同、特殊关系（如亲子）、自愿承担的照管或制造了危险情形（R v Miller 案）。
State of affairs crimes require only proof that the defendant was found in a prohibited situation, such as being drunk in a public place. No voluntary act is needed.
状态性犯罪仅需证明被告人处于被禁止的状态，例如在公共场所醉酒。无需证明自愿行为。
3. Mens Rea: The Guilty Mind | 犯罪意图：有罪心理
The highest level of mens rea is intention. Direct intent means the defendant’s aim or purpose was to bring about the prohibited consequence. Oblique intent applies where the consequence was virtually certain and the defendant appreciated that (R v Woollin).
最高级别的犯罪意图是故意。直接故意是指被告人的目的或目标是实现被禁止的后果。间接故意适用于后果几乎确定会发生且被告人意识到这一点的情形（R v Woollin 案）。
Recklessness is the conscious taking of an unjustified risk. The defendant foresaw a risk of the prohibited consequence and went on to take it unreasonably. For property and non-fatal offences, subjective recklessness (Cunningham) is the standard.
轻率是明知存在不合理的风险而冒险。被告人预见到发生被禁止后果的风险，但仍不合理地冒险。对于财产和非致命罪行，以主观轻率（Cunningham 标准）为准。
Some offences require a specific mens rea, such as dishonesty for theft. The test for dishonesty is now set out in R v Barton: what was the defendant’s actual state of knowledge or belief, and was the conduct dishonest by the standards of ordinary decent people?
某些罪行要求特定的犯罪意图，如盗窃中的不诚实。不诚实的检验标准由 R v Barton 案确立：被告人的实际认知或信念是什么，以及该行为按照普通正直人士的标准是否不诚实？
4. Non-Fatal Offences Formula | 非致命罪行公式
ASSAULT = INTENTION/RECKLESSNESS + CAUSING VICTIM TO APPREHEND IMMEDIATE UNLAWFUL FORCE
Assault requires no physical contact. Words alone, a threatening gesture, or even silent phone calls can be an assault if they cause the victim to believe force is about to be used immediately.
袭击不要求身体接触。仅言语、威胁性姿势，甚至无声电话，如果能令被害人相信即将遭受立刻的非法武力，就可构成袭击。
BATTERY = INTENTION/RECKLESSNESS + INFLICTION OF UNLAWFUL PERSONAL VIOLENCE
Battery is the actual application of unlawful force, however slight, without consent. Touching a person’s clothing can be enough (R v Thomas). Everyday jostling is excluded.
殴打是未经同意实际施加非法武力，无论多么轻微。触碰他人衣物已可能足够（R v Thomas 案）。日常推挤被排除在外。
| Offence | AR | MR |
|---|---|---|
| ABH (s.47) | Assault or battery causing actual bodily harm | Intention or recklessness as to assault/battery |
| GBH s.20 | Wounding or inflicting grievous bodily harm | Malice – intention or recklessness as to some harm |
| GBH s.18 | Wounding or causing grievous bodily harm | Intention to cause GBH OR intention to resist/prevent arrest + intent/recklessness as to GBH |
Actual bodily harm means any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of the victim, including psychiatric injury. Grievous bodily harm means ‘really serious harm’.
实际身体伤害指任何对被害人健康或舒适的伤害，包括精神伤害。严重身体伤害指“真正严重的伤害”。
5. Property Offences Equation | 财产犯罪等式
THEFT = APPROPRIATION + PROPERTY + BELONGING TO ANOTHER + DISHONESTY + INTENTION TO PERMANENTLY DEPRIVE
Theft, defined in s.1 Theft Act 1968, requires all five elements to be present simultaneously. Appropriation includes assuming any of the rights of an owner, such as selling, using, or destroying the property.
盗窃，根据《1968年盗窃法》第1条，要求五个要素同时存在。侵占包括行使所有者的任何权利，如出售、使用或毁坏财产。
Robbery is theft completed by force or threat of force immediately before or at the time of stealing. The force must be used in order to steal, and theft must be established first.
抢劫是以武力或武力威胁在盗窃前夕或盗窃时完成的盗窃。武力必须为了盗窃而使用，且必须先证明盗窃成立。
Burglary under s.9(1)(a) requires entry as a trespasser with intent to steal, inflict GBH or cause unlawful damage. Under s.9(1)(b), having entered as a trespasser, the defendant actually steals or inflicts GBH.
入室盗窃根据第9(1)(a)条要求作为侵入者进入并意图盗窃、造成严重身体伤害或非法损坏。根据第9(1)(b)条，作为侵入者进入后，被告人实际盗窃或造成严重身体伤害。
6. General Defences: The Negatives | 一般辩护：抵消因素
A complete defence results in acquittal. Self-defence allows reasonable force to protect oneself, another, or property. The force must be necessary and proportionate to the threat as the defendant honestly believed it to be.
完全辩护会导致无罪释放。自卫允许使用合理的武力保护自己、他人或财产。武力必须是根据被告人诚实相信的威胁而言必要且相称的。
Intoxication can be a defence if it is involuntary, such as drink spiking. Voluntary intoxication is only a defence to crimes of specific intent where the defendant lacked the mens rea due to intoxication, but may still be guilty of a lesser offence of basic intent.
醉酒如果是非自愿的（如被下药），可作辩护。自愿醉酒仅对特定意图犯罪可作为辩护，如果行为人因醉酒而缺乏犯罪意图，但仍可能被判犯有基本意图的较轻罪行。
Consent is a defence to minor touchings and to some sports injuries within the rules of the game. It is not a defence where the level of harm intended is ABH or above unless for recognised public policy reasons such as surgery.
同意是对轻微触碰和规则范围内的某些运动的辩护。但它不能用于意图造成实际身体伤害或以上伤害的情形，除非有公认的公共政策理由，如外科手术。
7. Negligence: The Tort Formula | 过失：侵权公式
NEGLIGENCE = DUTY OF CARE + BREACH OF DUTY + DAMAGE CAUSED BY BREACH
To succeed in a claim for negligence, the claimant must prove on the balance of probabilities that the defendant owed them a duty of care, broke that duty, and caused loss or injury that is not too remote.
要在过失索赔中胜诉，原告必须按盖然性权衡标准证明被告人对其负有注意义务、违反了该义务，并造成了非过分遥远的损失或伤害。
The duty of care is established using the neighbour principle from Donoghue v Stevenson and the Caparo test. You must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour.
注意义务通过 Donoghue v Stevenson 案的邻居原则和 Caparo 测试确立。你必须尽到合理注意，避免合理预见到可能伤害邻居的作为或不作为。
8. Caparo Three-Stage Test | 卡帕罗三阶段测试
DUTY OF CARE EXISTS IF: (1) HARM WAS REASONABLY FORESEEABLE + (2) PROXIMITY BETWEEN THE PARTIES + (3) IT IS FAIR, JUST AND REASONABLE TO IMPOSE A DUTY
The Caparo Industries plc v Dickman test is used in novel situations. Foreseeability means a reasonable person in the defendant’s position would have foreseen that someone in the claimant’s position might be injured.
卡帕罗测试用于新类型案件。可预见性是指被告人立场上的合理人会预见到处于原告处境的人可能受到伤害。
Proximity requires a close and direct relationship, either through physical closeness, a contractual relationship, or an assumption of responsibility. The third stage is a policy consideration; courts will not impose a duty if it would open the floodgates or is not in the public interest.
关联性要求存在密切、直接的关系，例如物理接近、合同关系或责任的承担。第三阶段是政策考量；如果打开诉讼闸门或不符合公共利益，法院便不会施加义务。
9. Contract Formation: Offer + Acceptance | 合同成立：要约+承诺
CONTRACT = OFFER + ACCEPTANCE + CONSIDERATION + INTENTION TO CREATE LEGAL RELATIONS
An offer is a definite promise to be bound on specific terms. It must be distinguished from an invitation to treat, which is an invitation to make an offer. Goods displayed on a shelf (Pharmaceutical Society v Boots) and advertisements are generally invitations to treat.
要约是承诺受特定条款约束的明确允诺。它必须与要约邀请区分，后者是邀请对方发出要约。货架陈列的商品（Pharmaceutical Society v Boots 案）和广告通常属于要约邀请。
Acceptance must be a mirror image of the offer; any variation is a counter-offer that destroys the original offer. The postal rule states that acceptance by post is effective once the letter is posted, even if it never arrives, provided the use of post was reasonable.
承诺必须完全对应要约内容；任何改变都是反要约，使原要约失效。邮寄规则规定，只要使用邮寄方式是合理的，以信件承诺在投递时即生效，即使信件永未到达。
10. Consideration and Intention | 对价与意图
Consideration is the mutual exchange of value; both parties must give or promise something of value. It can be a benefit to one party or a detriment to the other. Past consideration is no consideration unless there was an implied promise beforehand.
对价是双方价值的相互交换；双方都必须给予或承诺给予有价值之物。它可以是一方的利益或另一方的损害。既往对价不是对价，除非事先有默示承诺。
Intention to create legal relations is presumed in commercial agreements but rebutted by a clear clause. Social and domestic agreements are presumed not to be legally binding unless evidence shows otherwise, as in Merritt v Merritt.
建立法律关系的意图在商事协议中被推定存在，但可被明确的条款推翻。社交和家庭协议被推定无法律约束力，除非有相反证据，如 Merritt v Merritt 案所示。
11. Precedent and Statutory Interpretation | 先例与法律解释
STARE DECISIS = LIKE CASES ARE DECIDED ALIKE
The doctrine of judicial precedent means lower courts must follow the decisions of higher courts. The ratio decidendi (legal reasoning) is binding, while obiter dicta (comments in passing) are persuasive. The Supreme Court can depart from its own precedents using the 1966 Practice Statement.
司法先例原则意味着下级法院必须遵循上级法院的判决。判决理由具有约束力，而附带意见具有说服力。最高法院可依1966年实践声明偏离其先前的判例。
When interpreting statutes, judges apply rules: the literal rule uses the ordinary meaning of words; the golden rule allows departure from literal meaning to avoid absurdity; the mischief rule examines the problem the Act intended to remedy.
法官解释法规时适用规则：文义规则使用词语的通常含义；黄金规则允许偏离字面含义以避免荒谬结果；弊端规则考察该法旨在弥补的缺陷。
12. Sentencing Factors Equation | 量刑因素公式
SENTENCE = HARM + CULPABILITY – MITIGATING FACTORS
When passing sentence, the court assesses the seriousness of the offence by reference to the harm caused and the offender’s culpability. Aggravating factors, such as a vulnerable victim or previous convictions, increase the sentence.
法庭量刑时通过参考造成的危害和罪犯的可责性来评估罪行严重程度。加重因素，如针对弱势被害人或前科，会使刑期加长。
Mitigating factors reduce the sentence: a guilty plea, genuine remorse, mental health issues, a difficult background, or playing a minor role in the offence. The court must also consider the aims of sentencing: punishment, deterrence, rehabilitation, protection, and reparation.
减轻因素可减少刑罚：认罪、真诚悔恨、精神健康问题、艰难的成长背景或在犯罪中起次要作用。法庭还须考虑量刑目的：惩罚、威慑、改造、保护与补偿。
Published by TutorHao | Law Revision Series | aleveler.com
更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）
屏轩国际教育cambridge primary/secondary checkpoint, cat4, ukiset,ukcat,igcse,alevel,PAT,STEP,MAT, ibdp,ap,ssat,sat,sat2课程辅导，国外大学本科硕士研究生博士课程论文辅导