Criminal Law Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Criminal Law - Assignment Example The court is expected to carry out three different kinds of tests such as objective test where the particular court imputes the elements of mens rea based on the fact that any of the reasonable individuals that possess the same kind of abilities and knowledge as is possessed by the person that is accused in this case is expected to have such kind of elements. The second test is the subjective; in this test the court is expected to make an establishment as to what the person accused was thinking of at the time he caused the actus Reus. Finally, another test is the hybrid that involves both objective and subjective tests (van den Haag, 1978, p 27). These arguments was advanced by Dori Kimel in his case comment, ‘Inadvertent recklessness in criminal law’ (2004) LQR 548, where she analyses and critically evaluates the decisions of the House of Lords in R v G [2003] UKHL 50; [2004] 1 A.C. 1034 and R. v Caldwell (James) [1982] A.C. 341. This paper will therefore briefly identi fy the key arguments advanced by Kimel in her analysis of the two cases. Further, it will discuss whether Kimel’s critical evaluation of the two decisions is persuasively argued. Arguments advanced by Kimel in his analysis The facts of the case was that there were two boys who were aged 12 and 11 years, they are reported to have been camping without any particular permission by their parents when they decoded to go to the backyard of a nearby shop in the morning, they had newspapers that they had lit. The newspapers that they had lit are reported to have caused fire in nearby bin that was located against the wall of the shop, the fire immediately spread up the wall and eventually onto the roof. The fire caused an estimated damage of $1m. The two children made an arguments that they were expecting the fire to eventually burn itself out and did not give any thought to the risk that could be caused incase the fire spread (Kimel, 2003, p 21). In the judgment of the House of Lords , Lord Bingham actually saw the need of modifying the definition of Lord Diplock in order to ensure that infancy of the defence was accounted for which was containing the mischievous discretion notion. This rule required the various courts to make a consideration of the extent the children who were aged from eight or more years could be able to have a clear understanding of the differences that existed between wrong and right. Therefore, the test that was stipulated by Diplock of obviousness was expected to actually operate in unfair manner for the two children incase they were eventually held to the same particular standards the reasonable adults were held to. The courts finally held that the defendant must be clearly shown to have indeed subjectively appreciated a given risk to the property and health of the other party but eventually carried on any particular event before they could actually be said to be completely criminally culpable. This ruling abolished the historical object ive reckless test that had been previously recognized under the famous R v Caldwell (Kimel, 2004, p 548). Dori Kimel has indicated that recklessness is actually the particular critical mental element that exists within the Critical Damage Act of the year 1971. However, ten years following the enactment of the particular legislation, the House of Lords in the context of R v Caldwell made a controversial interpretation of the recklessness objectively as well as

Business management course work Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Business management course work - Term Paper Example A lack of coordination takes place when teams working on the same project do not coordinate and this lack of coordination is represented both vertically and horizontally. Unclear accountability mechanism further adds fuel to the fire of depleting aggregate performance of the organization. Centralization cannot be termed as an effective way to manage organization like RIM. There is no clear marketing strategy. Section II: Statements of the Problem Research In Motion (RIM) has failed to develop and maintain a sustainable motivation, accountability and effective marketing strategy (Castaldo, 2012). The organization has grown unorganized and unmanageable; where a lack of clear-cut direction and conflicting opinions have compounded the aggregate management of the company (Castaldo, 2012). Section III Causes of the Problem Demotivation Motivation is the degree to which an employee wants and selects to carry out specific behavior (Mullins, 2009, p. 471). This specific behavior is nurtured t o obtain intended departmental and organizational goals and objectives. As motivation has both aspects in the form of intrinsic and extrinsic manifestations, the employees of RIM were not given sustainable workplace environment in which they could convert their potential into the desired results. For instance, according to a former employee, the new operational staff members were never fully empowered to carry out their jobs (Castaldo, 2012). This means the staff did not receive authority, sense of work ownership and a clear cut direction to attain a particular set of objectives. As a result, the sustainable motivation did not continue instead demotivation replaced motivation. Lack of Coordination â€Å"It was common for a few teams working on the same project to realize they were unlikely to make the date, but no one spoke up, under the belief that another team was even farther behind†(Castaldo, 2012). This statement mentions that there was no active and consistent coordinat ion between teams working even on the same project. They were on their own and they did not feel necessity to obtain information and see their progress on the project. Additionally, there was no strong check from the senior management whether the teams assigned to work and complete the same project were working in the suggested direction or the teams were facing issues related to the same project. There was a complete absence of vertical and horizontal coordination in the organization. In the absence of coordination, there would be no way to entertain department and organizational objectives. Unclear Accountability Mechanism Accountability can also be defined as the systematic inclusion of critical elements of program planning, implementation and evaluation with an aim of achieving desired results (Wandersman et al., 2000, p. 389). At RIM, nobody was accountable when a proposal or project failed to meet the expected level of performance. In the absence of any accountability mechanis m, it would be very difficult to learn from mistakes and derive certain result-oriented lessons from such steps. When accountability mechanism is not present and nobody is ready and willing to take and accept responsibility, strategic loss and strategic decline is unavoidable and it is what that is happening