Strict Liability - G153 Criminal Law

Front 1

Definition

Back 1

• Proof of MR isn't required for at least part of the AR.

• AR must be voluntary.

• Absolute liability- involuntary act with no MR (Winzar- D put on a highway by police officer, then arrested) (Larsonneur- illegal alien).

• Most are statutory, few are common law (Lemon v Gay News- blasphemous libel).

• Basic presumption in criminal law is that MR is required.

Hint 1

W L LvGN

Front 2

Identifying a S/L offence

Back 2

• Presumption that MR is required (Sweet v Parsley- teacher rented house to cannabis smokers) (B v DPP- 15-year-old asked 13-year-old for sex, not S/L) (R v K- 26-year-old sexually assaulted 14-year-old he thought was 16).

• Words used in the Act may indicate MR is required (Cundy v Le Cocq- landlord convicted of employee selling alcohol to drunk person) (PSGB v Storkwain- sold prescription drugs to a forged certificate).

• Gammon (building regulations not followed) criteria helps decide:

1) Presume MR is required, especially for 'truly criminal' offences.

2) Where an offence concerns an 'issue of social concern' it is more likely to be S/L.

3) Would making the crime S/L encourage greater care and deter people from committing the offence?

• Conflicting cases (Sherras v De Rutzen- landlord acquitted for selling alcohol to police officer) (Alphacell- polluted matter into river).

Hint 2

SvP BvDPP RvK CvLC PSGBvS G SvDR A

Front 3

Social context

Back 3

• Blake- pirate radio broadcasts without a licence.

Hint 3

B

Front 4

'Truly criminal' offences

Back 4

• Wings v Ellis- Trade Descriptions Act 1968.

• Shah & Shah- newsagent sold lottery ticket to underage boy.

Hint 4

WvE S&S

Front 5

Examples of S/L offences

Back 5

• Illegal broadcasting (Blake).

• Pollution (Alphacell).

• Possession of Controlled Drugs (Warner).

• Trade Descriptions (Wings v Ellis).

• Gambling (Shah & Shah).

• Building regulations (Gammon).

• Road traffic (DPP v Hay).

• Alcohol (Cundy v Le Cocq).

Hint 5

B A W WvE S&S G DPPvH CvLC