Strict Liability

Question 1

Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Storkwain Ltd

Answer 1

• Pharmacists did not realise that a prescription was a forgery.
• Supplying the drugs without a genuine prescription made them guilty of the offence, even though the forgery was very
  difficult to spot.
• Strict Liability

Question 2

R v Larsonneur

Answer 2

• D, having left the UK, was sent back in police custody.
• Even though her return was not voluntary she was guilty of being ‘found in the UK’
• Absolute Liability

Question 3

Callow v Tillstone

Answer 3

• A butcher sold meat that had been passed fit to sell by a vet, Ds guilty.
• The butcher was guilty even though he was not at fault in anyway.
• No defence of no fault.

Question 4

Harrow LBC v Shah and Shah

Answer 4

• Ds had told their staff to ask for proof of age. Despite this a lottery ticket was sold to an under-age boy. Ds were guilty.
• Offence was one of strict liability. Ds guilty even though they had done their best to prevent such an offence happening.

Question 5

Sweet v Parsley

Answer 5

• Tenants in a farmhouse owned by D smoked cannabis there, landlord didn’t know.
• D was not guilty as there was a presumption that mens rea was required.

Question 6

Alphacell Ltd v Woodward

Answer 6

• Pumps at Ds factory failed, casuing polluted effluent to overflow into a river.
• There was no evidence either that the company knew of the pollution or that it had been negligent.
• Ds were guilty as the offence was on of strict liability. It was important to protect against pollution.

Question 7

B v DPP

Answer 7

• Conviction of F, 15 years old, for inciting a child under 14 to commit an act of gross indecency was quashed.
• Mens rea was required for the offence as it carried a maximum penalty for 2 years imprisonment.