Strict Liability- clarify

Question 1

What is meant by a strict liability offence?

Answer 1

-One which requires no mens rea.
-Almost all statutory in origin.

Question 2

Which case comes under ordinary strict liability?

Answer 2

Callow V Tillstone

Question 3

Callow V Tillstone

Answer 3

-D asked vet whether carcass fit for human consumption- vet said yes.
-guilty of offering unfit meat for sale- despite taking all reasonable precautions to avoid doing so.

Question 4

What is meant by absolute liability?

Answer 4

-no MR + a state of affair AR.

Question 4

Which cases go with absolute liability?

Answer 4

-R v Larsonneur
-Winzar V Chief constable of Kent.

Question 4

R V Larsonneur

Answer 4

-Defendant deported out of Ireland to UK
-Guilty of being illegally in the UK

Question 5

Winzar V Chief constable of Kent?

Answer 5

-homeless man in a hospital who was drunk and disorderly.
-A police officer escorted him out to a road. He was then charged for being drunk and disorderly on a road.

Question 6

What is an example of how strict liability applies in common law?

Answer 6

Whitehouse V Lemon and Gay news.

Question 7

Whitehouse V Lemon and Gay news.

Answer 7

-D published poem linking Jesus with homosexual acts- accused of blasphemy.
-intention to publish sufficient not MR for blasphemy.

Question 8

Which cases refer to the wording of an act?

Answer 8

-DPP V Collins.
-Pharmaceutical Society v Storkwain Ltd
-Cundy v Le Cocq
-Gammon Ltd v A-G of Hong Kong

Question 9

Which words in an act may indicate intention is required?

Answer 9

‘knowingly, ‘intentionally’ and recklessly’

Question 10

What happens if the wording of an act is unclear?

Answer 10

The courts will make a decision.
-unless criminal- not SL unless compellingly clear by parliament.

Question 11

DPP V Collins?

Answer 11

-Charged with ‘intentionally sending a grossly offensive message’.
-Grossly offensive is SL- only intention to send message.

Question 12

Pharmaceutical Society v Storkwain Ltd

Answer 12

-offence to sell medication without prescription from registered medical practitioner- forged
-strict liability.

Question 13

Cundy v Le Cocq

Answer 13

-D charged with selling a drunk person alcohol.
-Didn’t know- SL.

Question 14

Gammon Ltd v A-G of Hong Kong

Answer 14

-building collapsed- failed to follow OG plans
-illegal in HK to make substantial changes.
-can rebut need for MR if it says SL in the statute.

Question 15

Which cases go with regulatory offences?

Answer 15

-Smedleys V Breed
-Harrow LBC V Shah
-R V Bosher

Question 16

Smedleys V Breed

Answer 16

-convicted when found a caterpillar in tinned goods.
-guilty despite taking precautions.

Question 17

Harrow LBC V Shah

Answer 17

-sold 13 year old a lottery ticket despite staff warnings.

Question 18

R V Bosher

Answer 18

-driving with disqualified licence
-reasonable belief his licence was qualified irrelevant.

Question 19

Which cases go with public welfare?

Answer 19

-Alphacell Ltd v Woodward
-R V Blake
-R v Deyemi

Question 20

R v Deyemi

Answer 20

-electrical stun gun he thought was a torch.
-Strict liability under firearms act.

Question 21

R V Blake

Answer 21

-charged for broadcasting without a licence
-strict liability- could interfere with emergency communications.

Question 22

Alphacell Ltd v Woodward

Answer 22

-dirty water from factory entered river.
-despite precautions- strict liability- they caused it.

Question 23

Which cases go with true crimes?

Answer 23

-Sweet V Parsley
-B V DPP.

Question 24

Sweet V Parsley

Answer 24

-crime to which social stigma was attached should normally require a mens rea.
-unknown to her- students smoking pot in her house.

Question 25

B V DPP

Answer 25

-15 year old asked 13 year old to perform sexual acts (thought she was older).
-Strict liability does not apply to criminal offences.

This offence would have carried a 2 year prision sentence.

Question 26

Which case goes with promoting enforcement of law?

Answer 26

Lim Chin Aik v The Queen

Question 27

Lim Chin Aik v The Queen

Answer 27

-in Singapore with ban- was not alerted of ban.
-Law to prevent illlegal immigration.
-not enough to be sure statute dealt with ‘grave social evil’ no SL.

If making the offence SL will not help law enforcement – no SL

Question 28

What is meant by due dilligence?

Answer 28

-Where defendant has done all that was within his power to commit an offence
-no sensible pattern when Govt decides to include this defence – can be argued it should always be present for strict liability offences

Question 29

Example of no defence of mistake?

Answer 29

Cindy V Le Cocq

Question 30

Example of where there has been a defence of mistake?

Answer 30

-Police officer on duty served alcohol
-took off his duty armband
-unlike cindy case where you can identify a drunk person.

Question 31

What are the four factors of the gammon test?

Answer 31

1. The presumption of MR requirement may be removed by looking at the wording of the statute.
2. True crimes- presumption MR is needed
3. Mens rea can be removed in times of public safety.
4. Strict liability should only apply if it would increase higher standards and improve public safety.