📚 Year 13 Edexcel Law: Key Terminology Rapid Revision Guide | Year 13 Edexcel 法律：词汇术语速记指南
Mastering legal terminology is the gateway to success in Year 13 Edexcel Law. This guide provides precise definitions, memorable explanations, and applied contexts for the most frequently examined terms across criminal law, tort, and human rights. Use it to strengthen your essay answers and scenario analysis.
掌握法律术语是 Year 13 Edexcel 法律考试成功的关键。本指南提供了刑法、侵权法和人权法中最常考术语的精确定义、易于记忆的解释以及应用场景，帮助你强化论文答案和情境分析能力。
1. Actus Reus and Mens Rea | 犯罪行为与犯罪意图
The actus reus is the physical element of a crime: a voluntary act, omission (where a duty exists), or a state of affairs. For example, in murder, the actus reus is the unlawful killing of a reasonable creature in being.
犯罪行为（actus reus）是犯罪的客观要素，包括自愿行为、不作为（当存在义务时）或某种状态。例如，在谋杀罪中，犯罪行为是非法杀害一个活着的人。
The mens rea is the mental element: the defendant's intention, recklessness, or (in rare cases) negligence. For murder, the mens rea is intention to kill or cause grievous bodily harm (GBH). Remember the phrase “the act itself does not constitute guilt unless done with a guilty mind.”
犯罪意图（mens rea）是主观要素，即被告的故意、轻率或（极少数情况下的）过失。在谋杀罪中，犯罪意图是杀害或造成严重身体伤害的故意。记住这句话：“仅有行为不构成犯罪，除非具有犯罪心理。”
2. Causation | 因果关系
Causation links the defendant's act to the consequence. There are two limbs: factual causation (the ‘but for’ test – but for D's conduct, would the result have happened?) and legal causation (the defendant's act must be a substantial and operating cause of the harm, with no intervening act breaking the chain).
因果关系将被告的行为与结果联系起来。包括两部分：事实因果关系（“若非”检验——若非被告的行为，结果是否会发生？）和法律因果关系（被告的行为必须是造成损害的重大且持续起作用的原因，且不存在打破因果链条的介入行为）。
The ‘thin skull’ rule means take the victim as you find them: if the victim has a pre-existing vulnerability making the harm more severe, the defendant is still liable.
“蛋壳脑袋”规则意味着接受被害人的现状：如果被害人原本存在脆弱性导致伤害加重，被告仍需承担责任。
3. Strict Liability | 严格责任
Offences of strict liability do not require mens rea for at least one element of the actus reus. The prosecution only needs to prove the defendant did the prohibited act. Common examples include regulatory offences (selling alcohol to under-18s, food safety breaches). The key test is the Gammon test: starting presumption of mens rea, which can be displaced if the statute concerns an issue of social concern or public safety.
严格责任犯罪不要求对犯罪行为的至少一个要素证明犯罪意图。控方只需证明被告实施了被禁止的行为。常见例子包括监管类犯罪（向未满18岁者售酒、违反食品安全规定）。关键检验标准是Gammon案检验：起初推定需要犯罪意图，但如果成文法涉及社会关切或公共安全问题，这一推定可被推翻。
4. Non-Fatal Offences Overview | 非致命人身侵害罪概览
The ladder of non-fatal offences against the person: Assault (causing victim to apprehend immediate unlawful force – no touching required); Battery (unlawful application of force); Assault occasioning actual bodily harm (ABH) under s.47 OAPA 1861 (assault or battery causing harm that is more than transient or trifling); Malicious wounding/inflicting GBH under s.20; and Wounding/causing GBH with intent under s.18.
针对人身的非致命犯罪层级：企图伤害（使被害人担心即将遭受非法暴力——无需实际接触）；殴击（非法使用武力）；造成实际身体伤害的企图伤害/殴击（ABH，根据1861年《侵害人身罪法》第47条，造成超过短暂或轻微程度的伤害）；恶意伤害/造成严重身体伤害（第20条）；以及蓄意伤害/造成严重身体伤害（第18条）。
Remember the mens rea escalation: s.47 shares the mens rea of assault or battery; s.20 requires intention or recklessness as to some harm; s.18 requires specific intent to cause GBH or to resist arrest.
记住犯罪意图的递进：第47条共享企图伤害或殴击的犯罪意图；第20条要求对造成某些伤害具有故意或轻率；第18条要求造成严重身体伤害或拒捕的特定故意。
5. Murder and Voluntary Manslaughter | 谋杀与自愿误杀
Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being under the Queen's peace with malice aforethought (intention to kill or cause GBH). The mandatory life sentence underlines its gravity.
谋杀是在女王治下和平时期非法杀害他人，并具有恶意预谋（意图杀害或造成严重身体伤害）。强制终身监禁凸显其严重性。
Voluntary manslaughter arises when the actus reus and mens rea of murder exist but a partial defence reduces liability. Three partial defences: loss of control (Coroners and Justice Act 2009, s.54-55), diminished responsibility (Homicide Act 1957 s.2 as amended), and suicide pact. These reduce murder to manslaughter, giving the judge sentencing discretion.
自愿误杀发生在谋杀罪的犯罪行为和犯罪意图均成立，但因存在部分抗辩事由而减轻责任。三种部分抗辩：失控（2009年《验尸官与司法法》第54-55条）、减轻责任（经修订的1957年《杀人法》第2条）和自杀协定。这些将谋杀减为误杀，赋予法官量刑裁量权。
6. Theft and Robbery | 盗窃与抢劫
Under the Theft Act 1968, theft is the dishonest appropriation of property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it. The five elements: appropriation, property, belonging to another, dishonesty, and intention to permanently deprive. Use the mnemonic ‘All People Believe Dishonesty Is Permanent’ (A-P-B-D-I).
根据1968年《盗窃法》，盗窃是指不诚实地占有属于他人的财产，并意图永久剥夺他人对该财产的权利。五个要素：占有、财产、属于他人、不诚实、永久剥夺的意图。用口诀“所有人相信不诚实是永久的”（A-P-B-D-I）来记忆。
Robbery is theft completed by the use or threat of force immediately before or at the time of stealing, and in order to steal. If force is used after the theft is complete, it is theft plus assault, not robbery.
抢劫是在窃取行为之前或当时，为实施盗窃而使用或威胁使用武力完成的盗窃。若盗窃完成后才使用武力，则构成盗窃加攻击，而非抢劫。
7. Intoxication and Consent as Defences | 醉酒和同意作为抗辩
Intoxication by alcohol or drugs is generally not a defence to crimes of basic intent (where recklessness suffices), because voluntary intoxication is itself reckless. However, it may be a defence to crimes of specific intent if it prevents the defendant from forming the required intention. Involuntary intoxication can be a defence to any crime if the mens rea was absent.
因酒精或毒品醉酒通常不是基本故意犯罪（轻率即足够）的抗辩事由，因为自愿醉酒本身就是一种轻率行为。但是，就特定故意犯罪而言，如果醉酒使被告无法形成所需故意，则可作为抗辩。非自愿醉酒在任何犯罪中，若缺乏犯罪意图，均可作为抗辩。
Consent is a valid defence to assault and battery if the contact is within the scope of everyday life or lawful sport. For ABH or more serious harm, consent is generally not available unless it falls within established exceptions such as properly conducted sporting events, rough horseplay, or tattooing.
同意在日常接触或合法体育活动的范围内，是对企图伤害和殴击的有效抗辩。对于实际身体伤害或更严重的伤害，一般不能以同意为抗辩，除非属于公认的例外情形，如正当进行的体育活动、粗野嬉闹或纹身等。
8. Psychiatric Injury in Tort | 侵权法中的精神损害
In negligence, a duty of care for pure psychiatric injury is restricted to primary victims (those in the actual area of danger) and secondary victims (those who witness the event or its immediate aftermath). Secondary victims must satisfy the Alcock criteria: close tie of love and affection with the primary victim, proximity to the event in time and space, perception through their own unaided senses, and that a reasonable person would suffer psychiatric harm.
在过失侵权中，对纯粹精神损害的注意义务仅限于主要被害人（处于实际危险区域者）和次要被害人（目睹事件或其直接后果者）。次要被害人必须满足Alcock案标准：与主要被害人有亲密的爱与情感纽带；在时间和空间上接近事件；通过自身无辅助感官感知事件；以及一个理性人在此情况下会遭受精神伤害。
9. Non-Fatal Offences: Key Cases Memory Box | 非致命犯罪：关键案例记忆盒
Build a mental library of precedent: Ireland; Burstow (silence can be an assault; psychiatric injury can be bodily harm); Chan-Fook (harm includes psychiatric injury, but not mere emotions); Bollom (vulnerability of victim relevant to severity of ABH); Mowatt (for s.20, D must foresee some physical harm, not necessarily GBH); Morrison (s.18: intention to resist arrest is separate from intent to cause GBH).
在脑海中建立一个先例库：Ireland; Burstow案（沉默可构成企图伤害；精神伤害可属于身体伤害）；Chan-Fook案（伤害包括精神损害，但不仅仅是情绪波动）；Bollom案（被害人的脆弱性与ABH的严重程度相关）；Mowatt案（对于第20条，被告须预见到某种身体伤害，不一定是严重身体伤害）；Morrison案（第18条：拒捕的意图是独立于造成严重身体伤害意图的）。
10. Memory Techniques for Legal Terms | 法律术语记忆技巧
Use acronyms: for burglary under s.9 Theft Act, think ‘Trespasser Enters Building With Intent’ (T-E-B-I). Break down Latin terms: res ipsa loquitur (‘the thing speaks for itself’) applies in negligence when the accident would not normally happen without negligence. Visualise a barrel falling from a warehouse – the barrel ‘speaks’ negligence.
使用首字母缩略词：对于《盗窃法》第9条入室盗窃罪，记住“侵入者进入建筑意图行窃”（T-E-B-I)。拆分拉丁术语：res ipsa loquitur（“事实本身说明”）适用于过失案件中，当若无过失该事故通常不会发生时。想象一个从仓库掉落的木桶——木桶自己“说明”了过失存在。
Create mental images: for the ‘neighbour principle’ in Donoghue v Stevenson, imagine the decomposed snail in the ginger beer bottle, reminding you that you must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbour.
创造心理图像：对于Donoghue v Stevenson案中的“邻居原则”，想象姜汁啤酒瓶中腐烂的蜗牛，提醒你必须采取合理注意，避免可合理预见可能伤害邻居的作为或不作为。
11. Article 5 Right to Liberty and Security | 第5条 自由与安全权
Article 5 ECHR protects against arbitrary detention. Deprivation of liberty must be lawful and carried out in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law. A key focus for Edexcel is the tension between police powers (e.g., stop and search, pre-charge detention) and the right to liberty. The test for whether there has been a deprivation of liberty considers the type, duration, effects and manner of implementation of the measure.
《欧洲人权公约》第5条保护个人免于任意拘禁。剥夺自由必须是合法的，并依照法律规定的程序执行。Edexcel考试的一个重点是警察权力（如截查、指控前羁押）与自由权之间的张力。判断是否构成剥夺自由，需考虑措施的类型、持续时间、效果和实施方式。
12. Applying Terminology in Exam Scenarios | 在考试情境中应用术语
When tackling a problem question, always define the key term before applying it. For example: “The mens rea for theft is dishonesty and intention to permanently deprive. Applying this, Sam's swapping of price labels was an appropriation...” Use the precise statutory language and case law names to signal strong AO1. Then deploy AO2 by linking each element to the facts, and conclude with AO3 by evaluating any weaknesses or defences.
在解答情境题时，务必先定义关键术语，再加以应用。例如：“盗窃罪的犯罪意图是不诚实和永久剥夺的意图。据此，萨姆调换价格标签的行为是占有……”使用准确的成文法语言和判例名称来展示扎实的理解。然后通过将每个要素与事实相联系来展示分析，最后评价任何薄弱环节或抗辩以得出结论。
Published by TutorHao | Law Revision Series | aleveler.com
更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）
或截图后用「扫一扫 → 相册」选择本图