A Level Law Practice Exam

In SANTANA-BERMUDEZ, why was D liable for ABH?

1. He created a dangerous situation

2. He intended to injure the police officer

3. He failed to assist the officer in distress

4. He acted recklessly during the search

The correct answer is: He created a dangerous situation

In the case of SANTANA-BERMUDEZ, the determination of D's liability for ABH (Actual Bodily Harm) hinges on the concept of creating a dangerous situation. Here, D was aware that he had a needle in his pocket, which posed a risk to others, particularly the police officer conducting a search. By failing to disclose the presence of the needle, D created a situation that directly led to the injury of the officer when he was searched. This aligns with the legal principle that a person can be held liable for harm caused by their actions if they have set in motion a chain of events that leads to that harm, especially when they have knowledge of the potential danger their actions pose. In this case, D's knowledge of the needle and his choice to remain silent about it established the basis for liability, showing how his initial decision contributed to the injury sustained by the police officer. The other choices do not accurately reflect the legal principles at play in this case. While intention and recklessness can lead to liability under other circumstances, the core issue here was D's role in creating a dangerous situation that directly led to the harm.