Strict liability

Question 1

What is strict liability?

Answer 1

Being able to have criminal liability without the element of mens rea

Question 2

What is the liability equation?

Answer 2

Actus reus + mens rea OR strict liability + absence of defence = criminal liability

Question 3

Give an example of a strict liability offence

Answer 3

Speeding

Question 4

What are most s.l crimes considered as?

Answer 4

Regulatory (business crimes, traffic crimes)

Question 5

Does the defendant need to be aware of a crime taking place?

Answer 5

No such as in Harrow London Borough Council v Shah and Shah 1999 - selling lottery ticket to U 16

Question 6

Where did the concept of strict liability originate from?

Answer 6

Industrial revolution - health and safety issues around workers - difficult to prove employers intended to treat them badly - parliament removed issue of intent and created s.l

Question 7

Explain the case pharmaceutical society of GB v Storkwain Ltd 1986…

Answer 7

Supplying drugs without permission from registered medical practitioner as signature was forged even though he believed it to be real

Question 8

For nearly all S.L offences what must be proved?

Answer 8

The D did the AR and undertook it volutarily

Question 9

What is absolute liability?

Answer 9

No mens rea is needed at all - involve status offences where the AR is a state of affairs

Question 10

What case shows absolute liability?

Answer 10

Larsonneur 1933 - foriegn woman asked to leave UK went to Ireland but Irish police deported her and took her to police custody in UK - arrested for being here even though didn’t want to come back
Winzar v Chief Constable of Kent 1983 - drunk in hospital police took him out, arrested for being drunk on highway even though police put him there

Question 11

Explain the case Smedley’s v Breed 1974

Answer 11

caterpillar got into can of pea’s as looked like one - charged under Contravenes Food and Drinks Act 1955 - automatically liable but acquitted as they did everything they could to not put food out like that

Question 12

What will the courts always start with?

Answer 12

The presumption that mens rea is required

Question 13

What 2 cases illustrate the idea of not requiring mens rea?

Answer 13

Price 1875 and Hibbert 1869 - D was charged with having taken and married a girl under age of 16 without fathers permission against his will but he believed the girl was 18

Question 14

What is a voluntary act and what can it lead to?

Answer 14

An act which inadvertently caused a prohibited consequence leading to a conviction - meaning the D can be totally blameless in respect to the consquence

Question 15

Explain the case Callow v Tillstone 1900…

Answer 15

Butcher convicted of selling unfit meat even though vet said it was safe - convicted as mattered not how diligent he had been to ensure safety of the meat

Question 16

What is the defence of due diligence?

Answer 16

Defendant will not be liable if he can show that he did everything within his power not to commit the offence

Question 17

What defence is not available in strict liability?

Answer 17

Mistake
Cundy v Le Cocq 1994 - sold alcohol to intoxicated person, appellant said he wasn’t aware how drunk the person was - upheld
Sherras v De Rutzen 1895 - sold alcohol to police officer on duty as he has removed uniform. convicted but appealed saying the knowledge of the officer was a requirement of the offence

Question 18

What are the 2 offences in common law held to be ones of S.L?

Answer 18

Public nuisance

Criminal libel

Question 19

How many S.L offences are covered by statute?

Answer 19

Around half of all statute law - over 3500

Question 20

What is the first rule for courts when interpreting an act of parliament in a case that could be one of S.L?

Answer 20

To see if it includes the words ‘knowingly’ ‘intentionally’ ‘maliciously’ or ‘permitting’ - these require MR and cannot be one of SL

Question 21

When will the courts almost always treat a case as one of SL?

Answer 21

When the act makes it clear that mens rea is not required

Question 22

What are some acts that create confusion among courts?

Answer 22

Silent on the point if mens rea is required or not

Question 23

Explain the case Sweet v Parsley 1969…

Answer 23

Teacher letting house out to students, she was barely there, students doing drugs, she was convicted of having a house for the use of illegal drugs purposes, was quashed

Question 24

Explain the case Gammon LTD v Attorney General of Hong Kong 1984…

Answer 24

Builder deviated from original construction plans of a building, illegal to deviate in a substantial way but he believed it was only a minor change - his belief was irrelevant as courts saw it as more than minor
PRIVVY COUNCIL CASE - NOT BINDING - GAVE CLEAR GUIDEANCE

Question 25

What were the 5 key principles of SL established in Gammon LTD v AG for Hong Kong 1984…

Answer 25

Presumption of mens rea first
Must be truly criminal
Statute must clearly exclude mens rea
Can only be SL for public safety/concern (Gammon)
Only be applied where it will help enforce the law

Question 26

What can the wording of an act be?

Answer 26

Difficult to interpret - if silent the courts may look for implied presumption (Storkwain 1986 found other areas of act)

Question 27

What are offences which are regulatory in nature rather than truly criminal seen to be?

Answer 27

SL cases (traffic crimes, business crimes, speeding)
ALPHACALL 1972 - paper makers pollute river and block pipes, only £20 fine as courts noticed it wasn't truly criminal and their fine was putting their damages right

Question 28

When a case offers imprisonment it is more likely to be seen as truly criminal and not SL for example…

Answer 28

B v DPP 2000 - 14 year old boy next to 13 year old girl on us and repeatedly asked her for oral sex, she refused, he believed she was over 14 - SL conviction quashed as it was a true crime

Question 29

What are 4 reforms of SL?

Answer 29

No way of knowing whether parliament deliberately decided to make an offence one of SL - been suggested that draft legislation should always consider SL so saves time in court
Other option is to provide defence of due diligence
Offences that carry imprisonment should not be ones of SL
Suggests we should remove regulatory offences from criminal justice system - administrative issues