Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

CRIM 201 > STRICT LIABILITY - MILLER APPRCH > Flashcards

STRICT LIABILITY - MILLER APPRCH Flashcards

1
Q

Millar v Ministry of Transport facts

A

Millar was charged with driving with a disqualified license.

He believed the disqualification had ended due to a misunderstanding with the judge.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Millar v Ministry of Transport issue

A

The District Court and High Court ruled it as strict liability and said he didn’t prove a lack of fault, so he appealed to the Court of Appeal on mens rea grounds.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Millar v Ministry of Transport held

A

Millar essentially gives a seven-fold classification of offences which was reduced to the 3 classes as given in Mackenzie system.

Millar clears up any confusion of the classes and gives a step by step approach on how to determine what type of offence you have.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Cameron v R facts

A
  • The defendant and others were found guilty of importing, selling, having possession for sale the class C drug MDA (valued at $36 million).
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Cameron v R main points

A

fourth Class Established: Class Strawbridge.

Mackenzie and Millar were made before the NZ Bill of Rights Act (BORA).

BORA guarantees that individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Imposing a legal burden in Class 2 may undermine the presumption of innocence.

Cameron’s Approach: May lead to replacing strict liability with the Strawbridge standard for consistency with BORA and Woolmington.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

what is step 1 of the Millar approach

A

is there a clear legislative intent as to which is the three classes the offence belongs to

if no move to step 2

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

what is step 2 of the Millar approach

A

is there an overriding judicial history that assigns the offence to one of the there classes

if no

PRESUME ThE OFFENCE IS IN CLASS 1

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

WHAT IS THE Presumption if THE OFFENCE IS IN CLASS ONE

A

there is no legislative intent and there is no overriding judicial history

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

what is step 3 of the miller approach

A

can the presumption be displaced
- anything weight to do so
- if two, can b displaced

if yes go to step 4

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

what is step 4 of Millar approach

A

if presumption displaced usually CLASS 2 or 3

usually if get this far answer will be CLASS 2

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

what are guidelines to step 4

A
  • if either are reasonable interpretations, adopt to favourable which is CLASS 2
  • pwo are prima facie in CLASS 2
  • CLASS 3 are rare
  • if penalty is severe, shld b CLASS 2
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

step 5 of Millar approach

A

since it is class 2, what are the available defences that the accused can use to attempted to prove absence of fault on balance of probabilities

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

explain what are class 1 offences

A

MR offences

regular criminal offences requiring AR and MR.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

what are three types of mr

A

implied
expressed
presumed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

expressed mr

A

○ Parliament through its clear statutory language expressing MR is required.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

implied mr

A

Generally have to rely on common law (what courts have said)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

what is a tip for the exam regarding step 2 and implied mr

A

○ Step 2 isn’t normally going to be contentious because not expected to know any precedent that not given in CM - normally just say no but in real world would require research.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

what are examples of implied mr

A

Refusal: Unintentional refusal is unclear.

Publish/Broadcast: Intentional act; it’s unlikely to publish someone as a spy inadvertently (possibly involves an editor).

Possession of Material: In drug cases, possession implies awareness of what you have.

Allows or Permits: Refer to Turner v South Taranaki District Council.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Presumed MR

A

Nothing weighty enough to displace the presumption that it is not a regular MR offence (Step 3) then it is presumed to be class 1 MR offence.

Weighty enough” = if the offence is a PWO then the presumption may be displaced.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Turner v South Taranaki District Council
facts

A

Dog bit and wounded a passing pedestrian. Owner charged with being an owner of a dog that attacked a person and with “allowing” the dog in public unmuzzled.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Turner v South Taranaki District Council issue

A

is MR implied by the statutory language “allowed”?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Turner v South Taranaki District Council held

A

yes mr is implied, The word “allow” normally connotes actual knowledge of what is being allowed.

“Allow” in a regulatory setting is an implied MR of knowledge.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Police v Lindsay facts

A

Defendant was charged with 6 breaches of non-molestation order.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Police v Lindsay issue

A

Can MR be presumed from this offence?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Police v Lindsay

A

yes mr presumed

Drew parallels to Millar: both defendants ignored legal restrictions (license disqualification and court order).

In Millar, the AR required MR; similarly, it applies here.

Offences that protect private interests and court authority allow for presumed MR.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Police v TVNZ Ltd facts

A

TVNZ charged for publishing details of a defendant which was a breach of a name suppression order

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Police v TVNZ Ltd issue

A

What type of offence is this?

28
Q

Police v TVNZ Ltd held

A

Class #2 Strict Liability (CONTROVERSIAL)

this was possibly the wrong decision should have been a class #1 presumed MR offence

case is prove that presumed MR is not always clear cut.

29
Q

what is class 2 offences

A

Strict Liability (PWO Offences)

Renewal of the onus, burden on the accused to proved there was no mens rea on the balance of probabilities

30
Q

how do you identify a PWO

A
  • not usually found in crimes act
  • is a regulation
  • is a matter of public welfare
    worker safety, environmental protection, resource management,
31
Q

what about tikanga relation to pwo

A

tikanga is in the public welfare so a tikanga argument could be used when dealing with the natural environment.

32
Q

tell v maritime safety facts

A

Mr. Tell fell asleep at the wheel of his fishing boat. He was charged on the basis that he continued to operate a vessel with “knowledge” that he was likely to fall asleep as per s65(1) of the Maritime Transport Act 1994.

33
Q

tell v maritime safety issue

A

What type of offence is this?

34
Q

tell v maritime safety held

A

Operating a vessel in a dangerous manner is a Class 2 strict liability offence.

The legislative purpose is to ensure public safety by sanctioning those who unnecessarily endanger people or property.

35
Q

Jackson v Attorney-General facts

A

Jackson, a prisoner, was charged under section 32(1)(g) of the Penal Institutions Act 1954 after cannabis was discovered in a magazine during a cell search. He claimed he was unaware that the magazine contained cannabis.

36
Q

Jackson v Attorney-General issue

A

what type of offence was this?

37
Q

Jackson v Attorney-General held

A

Class 2 Strict Liability

Prison discipline offenses under the Penal Institutions Act 1954 are public welfare offenses (PWOs) because a well-managed prison is crucial for public safety and social order, helping to deter bad behavior.

38
Q

Stevenson v R facts

A

S pleaded guilty to two charges of attempting to enter into arrangement with a person under 18 to provide commercial sexual services.

39
Q

Stevenson v R issue

A

What type of offence is this?

40
Q

Stevenson v R held

A

Class 2 Strict Liability

Court found clear legislative intent that engaging in an act of prostitution under the age of 18 is a PWO because it is a matter of public safety.

41
Q

what is class number 3

A

Absolute Liability

42
Q

explain absolute liability offences

A
  • Absolute liability offences mean that MR is completely irrelevant
43
Q

describe class 2 offences

A

Renewal of the onus, burden on the accused to proved there was no mens rea on the balance of probabilities

44
Q

The majority of the time you’ll settle on class 3 is when

A

at STEP 2 where there is overriding judicial history (precedent):

Most decisions were made before the Millar General Approach in 1986.

If the Millar approach had been applied, some offenses might have been classified as strict liability.

45
Q

AHI Operations Ltd v Department of Labour facts

A

An employee was seriously injured while operating a machine owned by the defendant. The employee had removed the guard of the dangerous machine on an earlier occasion, and he had been warned not to.

46
Q

AHI Operations Ltd v Department of Labour issue

A

The issue is whether absolute liability can be assigned when the employee deliberately acted against a warning in this case.

47
Q

AHI Operations Ltd v Department of Labour held

A

An employer failing to ensure that a dangerous part of industrial machinery is fenced is an absolute liability offence.

Although recognized as a PWO, was placed in class 3 due to clear legislative intent and overriding judicial history.

48
Q

IRD v Thomas facts

A

The respondent was not capable of completing her own tax return and she had relied on her accountant to do so for the last 20 years. The return was not completed on time.

49
Q

IRD v Thomas held

A

yes absolute liability offence

failing to furnish a tax return when required is an absolute liability offence.

class 2 offence it would be absurd by allowing tax payers to avoid punishment and essentially gain extension if they could prove it was by fault of the accountant. This lead to the clear legislative intent of s 143 of the Tax Administration Act 1994.

49
Q

IRD v Thomas issue

A

Is this an absolute liability offence?

50
Q

Barrow v Van Den Beld facts

A

Charged for the importation of indecent films into NZ

51
Q

Barrow v Van Den Beld issue

A

Is this an absolute liability offence?

52
Q

Barrow v Van Den Beld held

A

yes absolute liability offence,
importation restriction cases are absolute liability cases.

Based on overriding judicial history of Fraser v Beckett

53
Q

Boyes v NZ Customs facts

A

Charged for the importation of two instruction manuals for the manufacturing of illicit drugs.

54
Q

Boyes v NZ Customs issue

A

Is this an absolute liability offence?

55
Q

Boyes v NZ Customs held

A

yes absolute liability offence,
importation restriction cases are absolute liability cases

Based on overriding judicial history of Fraser v Beckett

56
Q

what did the case of boyes v nz customs question

A

The case questioned if knowledge of the goods’ nature implied knowledge of their prohibition. It ruled that knowing one means knowing the other, aligning with the maxim “ignorance of the law is no excuse.”

57
Q

New Zealand Customs Service v DHL International Ltd facts

A

DHL removed packages from customers controlled area prior to being cleared

58
Q

New Zealand Customs Service v DHL International Ltd issue

A

Is this an absolute liability offence?

59
Q

New Zealand Customs Service v DHL International Ltd facts

A

Not AL, Removing goods from a customs controlled area is a class 2 strict liability offence.

The case also clarified that in vicarious liability, it must be proven that the company did not direct or approve the employee’s actions, which is difficult if the offense occurred within the employee’s work scope.

60
Q

King v South Waikato District Council facts

A

King is charged for being the owner of a dog that attacks. Two attacks occurred (1) to a neighbors rabbit and (2) to another dog whilst in the pound.

61
Q

King v South Waikato District Council issue

A

Is this an absolute liability offence?

62
Q

King v South Waikato District Council held

A

not absolute liability, Being the owner of a dog that attacks is a strict liability offence.

When a dog attacks, it’s not clear that the owner is responsible if the dog is out of control. Here, the second attack happened while the dog was at the pound, so the owner had no control. This should be a strict liability case, allowing a defense for the defendant.

63
Q

step 4 reason 1

Universal principle of beneficial interpretation (Sweet v Parsley)

A

If both interpretations are reasonable, we should choose the one favoring the accused, which would be class 2, as it allows for a defense.

63
Q

step 4 reason 2

Mackenzie states that PWO offences are presumed to be in class 2

is displaced when

A

this presumption is displaced only if it is clear that absolute liability was intended (this should have been picked up at step 1).

64
Q

step 4 reason 4

If the maximum possible penalty is severe the offence should not be in class 3.

A

We do not want to give a severe punishment without giving chance to prove a defence.

65
Q

fines and infringement fees

A

when they are applicable they are essential when deciphering if class 2 or 3 as class 2 requires a harsh maximum punishment
but can also not effect the class

CRIM 201 (41 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions