Strict Liability- clarify Flashcards
What is meant by a strict liability offence?
-One which requires no mens rea.
-Almost all statutory in origin.
Which case comes under ordinary strict liability?
Callow V Tillstone
Callow V Tillstone
-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.
What is meant by absolute liability?
-no MR + a state of affair AR.
Which cases go with absolute liability?
-R v Larsonneur
-Winzar V Chief constable of Kent.
R V Larsonneur
-Defendant deported out of Ireland to UK
-Guilty of being illegally in the UK
Winzar V Chief constable of Kent?
-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.
What is an example of how strict liability applies in common law?
Whitehouse V Lemon and Gay news.
Whitehouse V Lemon and Gay news.
-D published poem linking Jesus with homosexual acts- accused of blasphemy.
-intention to publish sufficient not MR for blasphemy.
Which cases refer to the wording of an act?
-DPP V Collins.
-Pharmaceutical Society v Storkwain Ltd
-Cundy v Le Cocq
-Gammon Ltd v A-G of Hong Kong
Which words in an act may indicate intention is required?
‘knowingly, ‘intentionally’ and recklessly’
What happens if the wording of an act is unclear?
The courts will make a decision.
-unless criminal- not SL unless compellingly clear by parliament.
DPP V Collins?
-Charged with ‘intentionally sending a grossly offensive message’.
-Grossly offensive is SL- only intention to send message.
Pharmaceutical Society v Storkwain Ltd
-offence to sell medication without prescription from registered medical practitioner- forged
-strict liability.
Cundy v Le Cocq
-D charged with selling a drunk person alcohol.
-Didn’t know- SL.
Gammon Ltd v A-G of Hong Kong
-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.
Which cases go with regulatory offences?
-Smedleys V Breed
-Harrow LBC V Shah
-R V Bosher
Smedleys V Breed
-convicted when found a caterpillar in tinned goods.
-guilty despite taking precautions.
Harrow LBC V Shah
-sold 13 year old a lottery ticket despite staff warnings.
R V Bosher
-driving with disqualified licence
-reasonable belief his licence was qualified irrelevant.
Which cases go with public welfare?
-Alphacell Ltd v Woodward
-R V Blake
-R v Deyemi
R v Deyemi
-electrical stun gun he thought was a torch.
-Strict liability under firearms act.
R V Blake
-charged for broadcasting without a licence
-strict liability- could interfere with emergency communications.
Alphacell Ltd v Woodward
-dirty water from factory entered river.
-despite precautions- strict liability- they caused it.
Which cases go with true crimes?
-Sweet V Parsley
-B V DPP.
Sweet V Parsley
-crime to which social stigma was attached should normally require a mens rea.
-unknown to her- students smoking pot in her house.
B V DPP
-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.
Which case goes with promoting enforcement of law?
Lim Chin Aik v The Queen
Lim Chin Aik v The Queen
-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
What is meant by due dilligence?
-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
Example of no defence of mistake?
Cindy V Le Cocq
Example of where there has been a defence of mistake?
-Police officer on duty served alcohol
-took off his duty armband
-unlike cindy case where you can identify a drunk person.
What are the four factors of the gammon test?
- The presumption of MR requirement may be removed by looking at the wording of the statute.
- True crimes- presumption MR is needed
- Mens rea can be removed in times of public safety.
- Strict liability should only apply if it would increase higher standards and improve public safety.
