AS Edexcel Law: Quick Formulas and Principles Handbook | AS Edexcel 法律：公式定理速查手册

📚 AS Edexcel Law: Quick Formulas and Principles Handbook | AS Edexcel 法律：公式定理速查手册

The AS Edexcel Law examination demands a precise memory of legal formulas, tests, and principles that underpin both substantive law and the English legal system. This handbook provides a concise reference to the essential ‘equations’ you need, from criminal liability to negligence and contract formation.

AS Edexcel 法律考试要求精确记忆支撑实体法和英国法律体系的法律公式、测试和原则。本手册为你提供必要的 “方程式” 速查，涵盖刑事责任、过失侵权、合同成立等核心内容。

1. Criminal Liability Formula | 刑事责任公式

The fundamental formula for most crimes: Actus Reus + Mens Rea + (absence of a defence) = Criminal Liability. Both elements must coincide in time. The table below summarises the components for key offences.

大多数犯罪的基本公式：犯罪行为 + 犯罪意图 + (无辩护理由) = 刑事责任。两个要素必须在时间上同时发生。下表总结了主要罪行的构成要素。

Exceptions include strict liability offences where mens rea is not required for at least part of the actus reus, and crimes of omission where liability arises from a failure to act when a duty exists. In all result crimes, causation must be established.

例外包括严格责任犯罪，其中至少部分犯罪行为不需要犯罪意图，以及不作为犯罪，当存在作为义务而不履行时产生责任。在所有结果犯罪中，必须成立因果关系。

2. Actus Reus: The Physical Element | 犯罪行为：物质要素

Actus reus can consist of: a conduct (an act or omission), a consequence (result), or a state of affairs. The act must be voluntary (Hill v Baxter).

犯罪行为可以包括：行为（作为或不作为）、后果（结果）或状态。行为必须是自愿的（Hill v Baxter案）。

Factual causation uses the ‘but for’ test: but for the defendant’s conduct, would the result have occurred? (White). Legal causation requires the defendant’s act to be a ‘substantial and operating cause’ of the result (Smith) and not merely de minimis (Cheshire).

事实因果关系采用 “若非” 测试：若非被告的行为，结果会发生吗？（White案）。法律因果关系要求被告的行为是结果的 “实质性和正在起作用的原因”（Smith案），且非微不足道（Cheshire案）。

An intervening act (novus actus interveniens) may break the chain of causation. Free, voluntary human acts will break it (Kennedy). Medical negligence only breaks the chain if it is so independent as to be overwhelming. The victim’s act will not break the chain if it is reasonably foreseeable (Roberts).

介入行为（新介入行为）可能打破因果链条。自由、自愿的人类行为将打破链条（Kennedy案）。医疗过失仅在如此独立以至于压倒性时才打破链条。如果被害人的行为合理可预见，则不打破链条（Roberts案）。

3. Mens Rea: The Mental Element | 犯罪意图：心理要素

Mens rea refers to the defendant’s mental state. The main types are: Intention, Recklessness, Negligence, and Transferred Malice. Direct intent exists when it is the defendant’s aim or purpose (Mohan).

犯罪意图指被告的心理状态。主要类型有：故意、轻率、过失和转移恶意。当是被告的目标或目的时，存在直接故意（Mohan案）。

Oblique intent: a jury may find intent where the consequence is a virtually certain result of the act and the defendant foresaw it as virtually certain (Woollin). This is an evidential standard, not a substantive rule.

间接故意：如果结果实质上是行为的必然结果，且被告预见到这一点，陪审团可推断故意（Woollin案）。这是一个证据标准，而非实体规则。

Recklessness is the conscious taking of an unjustified risk (Cunningham). The test is subjective: did the defendant foresee the risk and go on to take it? Objective recklessness (Caldwell) has been largely overruled.

轻率是有意识地冒不合理的风险（Cunningham案）。测试为主观标准：被告是否预见到风险而仍然冒险？客观轻率（Caldwell案）已被基本推翻。

Transferred malice: mens rea can transfer from the intended victim to the actual victim if the actus reus is of the same type (Latimer). It will not transfer if the intended crime differs from the resulting harm (Pembliton).

转移恶意：如果犯罪行为是同一类型，犯罪意图可从意图的被害人转移至实际被害人（Latimer案）。若意图的犯罪与发生的损害不同，则不能转移（Pembliton案）。

4. Theft Formula | 盗窃公式

Theft Act 1968, s.1: “A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.” The actus reus elements are appropriation (s.3), property (s.4), and belonging to another (s.5).

《1968年盗窃法》第1条：”任何人以永久剥夺他人财产的意图，不诚实地挪用属于他人的财产，即犯盗窃罪。” 犯罪行为要素是挪用（第3条）、财产（第4条）和属于他人（第5条）。

Mens rea: dishonestly (s.2) and intention to

Published by TutorHao | AS 法律 Revision Series | aleveler.com

更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）