Criminal law: Strict liability Flashcards
What are strict liability offences?
Offences where mens rea is not required in respect of at least one aspect of the actus reus.
What is an example case that demonstrates strict liability?
Pharmaceutical society of Great Britain V Storckwain Ltd 1986: the defendant was charged under section 58 of the Medicines Act 1968 for supplying prescribed drugs even though the prescription was forged.
What is absolute liability?
When no mens rea at all is required for the offence and there is no need to prove that the defendant’s actus reus was voluntary.
What are two example cases where voluntary actus reus did not need to be proven?
Winzar V Chief Constable of Kent 1983: the defendant was charged under section 2 of the licensing Act 1872 for being drunk on the highway even though the police removed him from the hospital onto the highway.
R V Larsonneur 1933: The defendant was found guilty under the aliens Order 1920 despite being involuntarily deported back to England by Irish authorities.
What is due diligence?
Where the defendant has done all that was within their power not to commit an offence.
What is an example case that shows due diligence is not available for a valid defence?
Callow V Tillstone 1900: the defendant was convicted of the offence of exposing unsound meat for sale even though the vet he asked to examine the meat assured him that it was alright.
What is no defence of mistake?
When the defence is still guilty even though they made a genuine mistake.
What example case that illustrates ‘no defence of mistake’?
Cundy V Le Cocq 1884: the defendant was convicted of unlawfully selling alcohol to an intoxicated person under section 13 of the Licensing Act 1872.
What are the points that need to apply for an offence to be one of strict liability?
It must be proved that the defendant did the actus reus
The actus reus must be voluntary
Mens rea does not need to be proved
Due diligence defence is not available
Defence of mistake is not available
What are the three existing common-law offences that are ones of strict liability?
Public nuisance
Criminal libel
Outraging public decency
How do the courts decide whether an offence is one of strict liability?
The courts start by identifying whether mens rea is required by looking where the Act of Parliament includes words indicating mens rea such as ‘knowingly.’
However, if the Act makes it clear that mens rea is not required, then the offence will be one of strict liability.
What is an example case where the judge presumed that the criminal offence required mens rea?
Sweet V Parsley 1969: the court presumed that the offence of using property to smoke cannabis required mens rea.
What case set out the criteria for a crime to be one of strict liability?
Gammon Ltd V Attorney General of Hong Kong 1985: These were
whether the offence is truly criminal,
whether the offence has an issue of public safety or concern and
whether the statute excludes mens rea.
What are quasi-crimes?
Regulatory offences that affect large areas of everyday life for example not wearing a seatbelt.
What are the justifications for strict liability?
Policy issues - the risks of danger to the public outweigh the defendant’s rights.
Social utility – making an offence one of strict liability promotes greater care by encouraging higher standards to protect society.
It is easier to enforce as there is no need to prove mens rea.
