Abstract
Dolus eventualis has correctly been described as an ‘enigma’. Not only has it been variously described by the courts, but the courts have applied the two-stage test without providing an in-depth analysis of what it means. Both dolus eventualis required for murder and conscious negligence required for culpable homicide, contain an element of subjective foresight of the remote possibility of death occurring. As a result, the distinction between murder and culpable homicide has become confused over the years, and is evident in the courts vacillating between findings of murder and culpable homicide. Considering the lack of clarity, this article examines the test for dolus eventualis in the case of murder and determines whether it can be more clearly distinguished from culpa, in the case of culpable homicide. German and American law and academic opinion is consulted in order to establish how the respective countries have dealt with the conflation of murder and negligent killings.
Highlights
MacKinnon[2] correctly points out that the meaning of murder is not self-evident, and that ‘both its definition and status relative to other forms of homicide present serious difficulties in criminal law theory’
Has it been variously described by the courts, but the courts have applied the two-stage test without providing an in-depth analysis of what it means. Both dolus eventualis required for murder and conscious negligence required for culpable homicide, contain an element of subjective foresight of the remote possibility of death occurring
Considering the lack of clarity, this article examines the test for dolus eventualis in the case of murder and determines whether it can be more clearly distinguished from culpa, in the case of culpable homicide
Summary
Dolus eventualis has correctly been described as an ‘enigma’. Has it been variously described by the courts, but the courts have applied the two-stage test without providing an in-depth analysis of what it means. Both dolus eventualis required for murder and conscious negligence required for culpable homicide, contain an element of subjective foresight of the remote possibility of death occurring. Considering the lack of clarity, this article examines the test for dolus eventualis in the case of murder and determines whether it can be more clearly distinguished from culpa, in the case of culpable homicide. German and American law and academic opinion are consulted in order to establish how the respective countries have dealt with the conflation of murder and negligent killings
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
