Fundamental principles of criminal liability in England and Wales, focusing on both parties to a crime and inchoate offenses like attempt. The first source details the roles of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), the defendant, and the victim, distinguishing between a principal offender (who commits the actus reus and possesses the mens rea) and accomplices or secondary parties who aid, abet, counsel, or procure a crime. It further explains concepts like joint enterprise and the requirements for effective withdrawal from an offense. The second source establishes the legal framework for attempt to commit an offence, requiring an act that is more than merely preparatory to the full crime, as defined by case law like R v Gullefer and R v Jones. Crucially, conviction for attempt demands a high threshold of mens rea, specifically the intention to commit the full offense, and liability can still apply even when the crime is factually impossible, as confirmed in R v Shivpuri.

A comprehensive SQE overview of the fundamental elements of criminal liability in English law, focusing on the concepts of actus reus (the guilty act) and mens rea (the guilty mind). The first source details actus reus, explaining how it can be proven through conduct, results, or the mere existence of a situation, alongside exceptions where an omission (failure to act) can create liability under certain duties. The second source examines mens rea, differentiating between intention, recklessness, and negligence, and introduces doctrines like transferred malice and the contemporaneity principle. Finally, the third source discusses general defences, concentrating on the rules governing intoxication, which can negate mens rea for specific intent crimes, and the principles of self-defence and defence of another, including the special allowances made for householder cases.

An SQE overview of equitable remedies in law, which contrast with traditional legal remedies like monetary damages, focusing instead on actions to correct a wrong or prevent future harm. It explains that equitable remedies, such as injunctions and specific performance, are granted at the court’s discretion only when financial compensation is inadequate, and are subject to specific principles like the "Clean Hands" Doctrine and Laches. The text details specific performance as an order to fulfil a contractual obligation, often used for unique items like real estate, and discusses the use of injunctions (both prohibitory and mandatory) to prevent or compel certain actions, citing case law concerning employment contracts. Finally, the source differentiates these remedies from indemnities and guarantees, explaining that an indemnity creates a primary obligation for compensation, whereas a guarantee establishes a secondary obligation contingent upon a debtor's default.