Malice Definition

GLOSSARY

What does Malice mean?

Malice is not to be understood in terms of “wickedness” but in terms of intention to cause harm or at least actual foresight that harm may result.

“Maliciously” is an element of various offences in the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, and where it is concerned with doing an act it means intending to cause the relevant harm or at least foreseeing the risk of causing that harm.

View the related practice notes about Malice

Transferred mens rea

The principle of transferred malice/transferred mens reaThe Supreme Court has stated that a better description for transferred malice might be ‘transferred mens rea’. The term ‘transferred malice’ has been described as ‘a misleading label’.This article will refer to the principle as ‘transferred mens rea’. This principle becomes relevant where a criminal intention leads to an unintended outcome or harm. It may apply provided that the outcome or harm is the same kind as intended, even if the actual victim is not the same as the intended victim.Latimer exemplifies the basic principle. D tried to assault V with his belt. He missed V and accidentally hit V2. D was found guilty of assault despite not having intended to hit V2. This reasoning was later applied in Mitchell, in which D assaulted V causing him to fall on V2. V2 was elderly and suffered a broken bone that led to her death in hospital. D was convicted of manslaughter despite having had no intention to assault V2. The court held that it...

Complaints—SRA 2011 regime and SRA 2019 regime compared [Archived]

Complaints—SRA 2011 regime and SRA 2019 regime compared [Archived] ARCHIVED: This archived Practice Note contrasts the requirements in the Solicitors Regulation Authority’s (SRA’s) 2011 and 2019 regimes as well as wider requirements in relation to complaints. There is a separate Practice Note providing more detailed guidance on the SRA’s 2019 complaints requirements—see Practice Note: Complaints—law firms. Regulatory requirements in relation to complaints are contained in various places, including the 2019 Codes, the SRA Financial Services (Conduct of Business) Rules, the SRA Transparency Rules and the SRA Indemnity Rules. Applicable requirements also stem from the Legal Services Board (LSB). These are summarised in the Legal Ombudsman (LeO) Scheme Rules. SRA requirements in the 2019 Codes in relation to complaints specifically apply only when you are providing services to the public or a section of the public. The requirements in the 2019 Codes represent the bare bones of those in the 2011 Code. You will see in the tables below, however, that the pared-down requirements in the 2019 Codes...

Discover our 50 Practice Notes on Malice

Reply (defamation)

Reply (defamation) Claim No.:HQ [insert claim number] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE KING’S BENCH DIVISION ROYAL COURTS OF JUSTICE MEDIA AND COMMUNICATIONS LIST PARTIES: (1) [Insert full name of claimant/first claimant] (2) [[Insert full name of second claimant]] [Claimant OR Claimants] and [Insert full name of defendant] Defendant _____________________________________ REPLY _____________________________________ 1 The [Claimant joins OR Claimants join] issue with the Defendant on his Defence save for the admissions it contains and those averments therein which are expressly admitted below. Paragraph references are to the Defence. 2 The [Claimant denies OR Claimants deny OR that the words complained of in the meanings set out at paragraph 8.1 of the Defence are true. Without limitation to the generality of this denial as to the particulars of truth advanced to support those imputations, the [Claimant pleads OR Claimants plead] as follows: 2.1 [set out the claimant’s/claimants’ response to the Particulars of Truth set out by the defendant in his defence, admitting or denying as appropriate]. 3 It...

Fraud risk management audit—law firms

Fraud risk management audit—law firms Question Additional guidance Yes/No Action points (if any) Have you appointed someone who is responsible for overall fraud risk management? Most areas of the firm can be the victim of fraudulent activity so responsibility needs to be assigned accordingly.Allocate responsibility for fraud issues and fraud risk management to a senior manager in the business—ideally someone with knowledge and understanding of fraud issues. This could be your nominated officer—see Precedent: Money Laundering Regulations 2017—nominated officer job description and role profile—law firmsThe compliance office for finance and administration should be closely involved to advise on financial aspects of fraud. Have you identified the most relevant fraud issues for your firm? Most fraudulent activities occur or are caused by people within the organisation as a result of carelessness or an error or omission (or even malice).See Precedents:• Fraud risk assessment—law firms • Fraudulent employees—Warning signs—for staff Do you have policies and procedures to reduce the risk of fraud? Even in small...

Dive into our 3 Precedents related to Malice

Refusing a data subject request—what is ‘manifestly unfounded or excessive’?

Refusing a data subject request—what is ‘manifestly unfounded or excessive’? The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) provides for enhanced rights for data subjects, including providing rights of access, rectification, erasure and restriction of processing, data portability, a right to object to processing and a right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing, including profiling, with strict time limits for complying. Where a data subject request is manifestly unfounded or excessive, in particular because of its repetitive character, you can either: • charge a reasonable fee taking into account the administrative costs of providing the information or communication or taking the action requested—see Precedent: Response to data subject request—all rights—charging a fee or extension of time to respond • refuse to act on the request Each request must be considered individually on a case-by-case basis. You bear the burden of demonstrating the request is manifestly unfounded or excessive. In order to do so, you should keep a record of your reasoning. Where...

Can a council or its members or officers be personally responsible where there is a breach of a statutory duty?

Can a council or its members or officers be personally responsible where there is a breach of a statutory duty? Local authority In general terms, a local authority is subject to the ordinary principles of civil law and may be convicted of a criminal offence. For an actionable breach of statutory duty claim to brought against a local authority, in the absence of express provision giving rise to a claim for damages, a claimant has to establish the following: • parliament imposed a statutory duty for a limited class of the public • breach of the duty should give rise to a private law action for damages Without a specific statutory regime for remedies such as prosecution, penalties or compensation, a common law action for damages may be difficult for breach of statutory duty although a civil remedy may still be possible. You may wish to consider the cases of X (Minors) v Bedfordshire County Council and Phelps v Hillingdon London Borough Council for...

See the 4 Q&As about Malice

Family weekly highlights—12 December 2024

This week's edition of Family weekly highlights includes a review of the most significant family law developments in 2024 and discussion of what might be the key developments in 2025. Details of the Transparency and Open Justice Board's invitation to respond to its proposed key objectives, Family Justice Council guidance on responding to allegations of alienating behaviour and updated MyHMCTS How to apply online for a divorce or dissolution guidance are set out. The expansion of the transparency reporting pilot for financial remedy proceedings and recent judgments on failure to provide accommodation and care proceedings are considered. New graphics added to Lexis+ Family Practical Guidance in 2024 are also set out.

Private Client weekly highlights—14 March 2024

This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) the FATF’s updated guidance on beneficial ownership and transparency of legal arrangements, (2) BH v JH, in which the Court of Protection held that unspecified charities who were to benefit from a residuary gift must be notified when the statutory Will is altered, (3) HMT consults on the effectiveness of the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017, (4) analysis of some key features of the Trusts and Succession (Scotland) Act which came into force on 30 January 2024; (5) the Charity Commission updates guidance to reflect CA 2022 changes coming into force, and (6) the publication of Finance (No. 2) Bill 2024.

Read the latest 97 News articles on Malice

Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

Case studies

"The way UU��ֱ�� dealt with us was receptive and not pushy. They took the time to get to know us and what we needed as a business."

Irwin Mitchell

Access all documents on Malice

GET ACCESS NOW

Top

Trial

UU��ֱ��

GLOSSARY