R v Kuddus [2019] EWCA Crim 352

Court: Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Facts: V, who had a mild nut allergy, died after eating peanuts in D’s takeaway food.

Held: Allowed the appeal. Conviction quashed. The chef (D) was unaware of the risk and thus could not be held criminally negligent. Court confirmed that restaurant owners like K owe a duty of care to their customers.

Key Judicial Statement: Lord Justice Holroyde remarked, "A conviction for manslaughter requires awareness of a serious and obvious risk, which was not present in this case."

💡Leveluplaw : the charge of gross negligence manslaughter requires five elements to be proven by the Crown: (1) a duty of care; (2) a breach of that duty; (3) reasonable foreseeability that the breach gave rise to an obvious and serious risk of death; (4) that death was caused by the breach; (5) gross negligence.