翻訳と辞書 Words near each other ・ R v Daviault ・ R v Davidson ・ R v Davis ・ R v DB ・ R v Dear ・ R v Department of Trade and Industry, ex parte Broadcasting, Entertainment, Cinematographic and Theatre Union ・ R v Dersch ・ R v DeSousa ・ R v District Auditor No 3 Audit District of West Yorkshire MCC, ex p West Yorkshire MCC ・ R v Dixon ・ R v Drybones ・ R v Du Plessis ・ R v Duarte ・ R v Dudley and Stephens ・ R v Dyment ・ R v Dytham ・ R v Eastern Terminal Elevator Co ・ R v Edwards Books and Art Ltd ・ R v Evans ・ R v Ewanchuk ・ R v Faulkner ・ R v Fearon ・ R v Feeney ・ R v Finta ・ R v Forlee ・ R v G ・ R v George ・ R v Ghosh ・ R v Glad Day Bookshops Inc ・ R v Gladstone Dictionary Lists mini英和辞書 mini和英辞書 Webster 1913 Latin-English FOLDOC Wikipedia English ウィキペディア

翻訳と辞書　辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ] スポンサード リンク R v Dytham ： ウィキペディア英語版 R v Dytham ''R v Dytham'' () Q.B. 722 is an English criminal law case dealing with liability for omissions. The court upheld the common law mantra that if there is a duty to act, then failure to do so is an offence. A police officer from St.Helens, witnessed the death of a nightclubber outside Cindy's nightclub but took no action to help because had he reported it then Dytham would have had to stay beyond the end of his shift. The defendant was convicted of the common law offence of misconduct in a public office. The court rejected the defendant's contention that this offence required malfeasance, or at least misfeasance, and did not extend to non-feasance. The court held that as a police officer, he had a duty of care to all of society, unlike civilians, in which case, there is no duty to put oneself at harm. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「R v Dytham」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.