University of London — LLB

⚖️ Criminal Law
MCQ Practice

1,699 practice questions · 174 topics · Study on WhatsApp

✨ Free 3-day trial · PKR 1,999/month after · No card needed

🎓 Built by UoL LLB graduates · 🤖 Powered by AI + exam intelligence from past papers

Start Practising on WhatsApp

No sign-up · No download · Free to start

Scan to start
on WhatsApp

Exam intelligence

All topics in Criminal Law

Every topic in the knowledge graph — mapped from the official syllabus and textbook.

Criminal Law
Chapter 1: Introduction
The Lawyer's Method
Principle of Legality
Chapter 2: Building Blocks of Criminal Liability
Actus Reus
Mens Rea
Defences
Burden of Proof
Standard of Proof
Strict Liability
Chapter 3: Actus Reus — Conduct and Circumstances
Act Requirement
Omissions and Criminal Liability
Duty Situations (Omissions)
Miller Principle
Situational Crimes
Crimes of Possession
Chapter 4: Actus Reus — Consequences and Causation
But-For Test (Factual Causation)
Legal Causation (Substantial and Operative Cause)
Eggshell Skull Rule
Novus Actus Interveniens
R v Kennedy (No 2) [2007] UKHL 38
Chapter 5: Mens Rea — Criminal Fault
Direct Intention
Oblique (Indirect) Intention — Woollin Direction
Specific Intent and Basic Intent
Recklessness (Cunningham/Subjective)
Negligence
Chapter 6: Coincidence of Actus Reus and Mens Rea
Temporal Coincidence
Correspondence Principle
Transferred Malice
Criminal Homicide: Overview
Murder: Mens Rea
GBH Rule
Loss of Control (Partial Defence)
Diminished Responsibility (Partial Defence)
Constructive (Unlawful Act) Manslaughter
Gross Negligence Manslaughter
Rape: Overview and Elements
Consent in Sexual Offences (s.74 SOA 2003)
Assault and Battery
Section 47 OAPA 1861: ABH
Section 20 OAPA 1861: Malicious Wounding/GBH
Section 18 OAPA 1861: Wounding/GBH with Intent
Consent as a Defence to Assault
Automatism
Insanity: M'Naghten Rules
Intoxication
Self-Defence and Defence of Another
Duress by Threats
Duress of Circumstances (Necessity by Threat)
Necessity
Theft: Elements (Theft Act 1968)
Dishonesty: The Ivey Test
Intention Permanently to Deprive (s.6 TA 1968)
Burglary (s.9 Theft Act 1968)
Fraud (Fraud Act 2006)

Live preview

See what you'll practice

Real questions from our database — the exact format you'll get on WhatsApp.

SaveMeTutor

● online

Miller Principle

Question 1

How did R v Evans [2009] extend the principle in R v Miller [1983]?

11:26 ✓✓

A By holding that supplying drugs creates a duty to seek help if the user overdoses. ✓

B By ruling that only fire-related dangers trigger the Miller duty.

C By requiring that the defendant must have intended the initial dangerous act.

11:26 ✓✓

✅ Correct!
Evans applied Miller to drug supply—by supplying and encouraging use, D contributed to danger and assumed responsibility. Option B is false—Miller applies beyond fire. Option C contradicts Miller, where act was accidental.

11:26 ✓✓

Assault and Battery

Question 2

Which of the following best explains why the mens rea for assault and battery was updated following R v G and R [2003]?

11:26 ✓✓

A The ruling replaced intention with negligence as the minimum fault requirement for all non-fatal offences.

B The ruling confirmed that recklessness in these offences must be subjective, based on the defendant’s awareness of risk. ✓

C The ruling allowed conviction based on objective foreseeability of harm, even if the defendant was unaware.

11:26 ✓✓

✅ Correct!
R v G and R [2003] established subjective recklessness as the standard for non-fatal offences. This applies to assault and battery, requiring awareness of the risk of causing apprehension or contact.

11:26 ✓✓

Crimes of Possession

Question 3

The defendant is charged with possession of cannabis found in the glove compartment of a car they borrowed. What must the prosecution prove for actus reus?

11:26 ✓✓

A That the defendant owned the car and had exclusive access to the compartment.

B That the defendant knew the drugs were there and had control over them. ✓

C That the defendant used the drugs at some point during the journey.

11:26 ✓✓

✅ Correct!
Possession requires knowledge and control—Gillick and Deyemi. Ownership is not required; constructive possession suffices. Option A is too narrow; C confuses possession with use.

11:26 ✓✓

Pricing

Simple, transparent pricing

Try everything free for 3 days. No credit card needed to start.

Free Trial 3 Days

PKR 0 / 3 days

Full access — try everything before you commit.

✓ Unlimited questions
✓ All 22 subjects
✓ Instant explanations with case citations
✓ Spaced repetition (SM-2)
✓ Score tracking + weak-spot detection
✓ Exam mode with timed tests

Start Free Trial

No sign-up · No credit card · Instant access

Monthly Best Value

PKR 1,999 / month

Less than a single tutoring session. Cancel anytime.

✓ Everything in Free Trial
✓ Unlimited questions forever
✓ 70,000+ exam-quality MCQs
✓ Questions from real past papers
✓ AI-powered study plans
✓ Priority support

Start Free, Pay Later

Pay only after your 3-day trial ends

⚖️ Criminal Law
MCQ Practice

Top 10 exam topics

All topics in Criminal Law

See what you'll practice

Simple, transparent pricing

Explore other UoL LLB subjects

Ready to master Criminal Law?

⚖️ Criminal LawMCQ Practice

Top 10 exam topics

All topics in Criminal Law

See what you'll practice

Simple, transparent pricing

Explore other UoL LLB subjects

Ready to master Criminal Law?

⚖️ Criminal Law
MCQ Practice