Criminal Law

Question 1

Advantages of S.L (7)

Answer 1

Time and cost of court
Public safety-promotes higher standards
Easy to prove-take more care, more people would evade liability if MR required
Deterrent-as so easy to be convicted
Proportionate punishments-small fines
Encourages compliance e.g speeding
Due diligence-reduce harshness of SL

Question 2

Criticisms of S.L (8)

Answer 2

Controversial-should MR be there? Unaware=guilty
Can target wrong vulnerable people e.g young
Due diligence defence often unavailable (Harrow v Shah-was still guilty)-unfair
Stigma-criminal record can damage reps so MR should be required (Alphacell v Woodward)
Weak punishment-prioritise profit over public

Cheapness can be offsetted by regulatory costs
Is it really a deterrent?speeding exists
Clarity-poor drafting, requires statutory interp from judges if act is silent on MR

Question 3

Due diligence-Shah and Shah

Answer 3

Although he had taken all reasonable steps to not sell to underaged, nothing in act suggested parliament intended due diligence to apply. Was still guilty

Question 4

Stigma and case

Answer 4

Alphacell v Woodward-polluted water, fined £20 but had lots of social stigma attached

Question 5

Weak punishment (fine)

Answer 5

Businesses may still choose profit over safety regardless of SL, as often only a fine