Strict Liability

Question 1

When does strict liability arise?

Answer 1

When a statute is silent on MR

Question 2

R v Strawbridge

Answer 2

Facts:
- Accused cultivated a canabis plant
- thought they were mustard seeds
Test:
- MR will be presumed to exist due to the presence of AR
- Open to the defendant to provide some evidence that raises reasonable doubt of MR
- Prosecution then must dispel the reasonable doubt or the defendant is aquitted

Question 3

Is Strawbridge still the NZ approach?

Answer 3

No

Question 4

When would you apply Strawbridge?

Answer 4

Only ever in an analgous case

Question 5

How many classes of offences are there?

Answer 5

3

Question 6

What are the classes of offences?

Answer 6

Class 1
- Full Mens Rea Offences

Class 2
- Strict Liability Offences

Class 3
- Absolute Liability Offences

Question 7

What are some common law features of PWOs?

Answer 7

• very little stigma attached
• No imprisonment
• Punishable by fine
• Bad because it is prohibited but not morally wrong

Question 8

What are some features of PWOs generally?

Answer 8

Deal with matters of public welfar:
- Public safety
- Transportation safety
- Public health; worker safety
- Environmental protection
- Resource management
- Species conservation
- Animal welfare
- Taxation or other revenue sources
- Customs or trade regulation

Question 9

Examples of PWOs?

Answer 9

• Traffic offences
• Community bylaws
• Environmental regulations
• Food, drink, and drug safety rules

Question 10

Police v Creedon

Answer 10

Facts:
- failure to give way to cyclist
- view was blocked
Held:
- Creedon not liable
- The regulation in question should not be an absolute liability offence, because it does not impose an unvarying obligation on the driver
- Strawbridge inappropriate for quasi-criminal offences
- The appropriate qualification here is “absence of fault”
- Mens Rea is not irrelevant in quasi-criminal offences

Question 11

Ministry of Transport v Bernet Motors

Answer 11

Facts:
- Truck carrying livestock driving through Timaru
- went u steep streets spilling excrement
Held:
- Notes the Sault Ste Marie case
- Does not adopt yet

Question 12

Civil Aviation Department v MacKenzie

Answer 12

Facts:
- Pilot clipped power line
Held:
- formal adoption of Sault Ste Marie classifications into NZ law
- Here, did not have MR and was an honest, reasonable mistake

Question 13

Which case adopts Sault Ste Marie into NZ law?

Answer 13

Civil Aviation Department v MacKenzie

Question 14

How is the legal burden imposed on the defendant justified in MacKenzie?

Answer 14

• not truly criminal situations
• accused know best what they did
• beneficial to accused

Question 15

What is the process for proving class 2 offences?