STRICT LIABILITY

Question 1

What conditions must apply for a case to be one of absolute liability? (2)

Answer 1

-the offence does not require any mens rea
-there is no need to prove that the defendant’s actions were voluntary

Question 2

what is an example of a strict liability demonstration? (1)

Answer 2

pharmaceutical society of GB v stockwain ltd (1986)

Question 3

what occurred in the pharmaceutical society of GB v Stockwain ltd (1986)? (3)

Answer 3

the defendants were charged under the medicine act 1968 which states that certain drugs can not be given unless prescribed by a doctor. The defendant forged the prescriptions but was not found to be acting dishonestly but deceived the pharmacists. house of lords health that the divisional court should convict the defendant pharmacists had subscribed drugs without genuine prescription.

Question 4

what do cases of absolute liability involve? (2)

Answer 4

involves statute offences where the offence is a ‘state of affairs’
the defendant is liable because they have been caught in a certain situation.

Question 5

what is meant by strict liability offences? (1)

Answer 5

a mens rea is not required for at least one section of the actus reus.

Question 6

what occurred in the case of winzar (1983)? (3)

Answer 6

the defendant was taken to the hospital via ambulance after examination the doctors said that he was just drunk. he was told to leave but later he was found in a corridor so the police were called. The police brought him to a roadway and came to the same conclusion that the doctors did. the police charged him with being drunk on the side of a highway contrary to the licensing act 1977. his conviction was upheld.

Question 7

what is meant by absolute liability? (1)

Answer 7

no mens rea is required and the actus reus does not have to be voluntary.

Question 8

what cases illustrate the idea of strict liability? (2)

Answer 8

R v Prince (1875)
R v Hibbert (1869)

Question 9

what occurred in the case of Hibbert (1869)

Answer 9

a man took a 14 year old girl to a private location and had sex with her. he did not know that he was taking her away from the possession of her father, the mens rea was required for the actus reus. age aspect was of strict liability. intention was not proved.

Question 10

what occurred in Prince (1875)? (2)

Answer 10

prince took a girl who was still in the possession of her father who he believed to be 18. his intent was to take her away from the possession of her father, the mens rea was required for the actus reus. court held that knowledge of her age was not required. case was of strict liability.

Question 11

What are the common law strict liability offences? (3)

Answer 11

-public nuisance
-criminal libel
-outraging public indecency

Question 12

What cases illustrate the no defence of mistake, in terms of strict liability? (2)

Answer 12

Cundy v le corq (1884)
Sterras v de rutzen (1895)

Question 13

What occurred in Gammon (1984)? (1)

Answer 13

Appellants had been charged with deviating from building work in a material way from the approved plan contrast to Hong Kong building ordinances.

Question 14

What four factors must be considered in terms of the gammon test? (4)

Answer 14

-presumption can only be displaced if this is clearly or by necessary implication the effect of the words of the statute
-presumption where the offences is truly criminal in character
-presumption displaced is statute is concerned with social concern
-strict liability should apply if it will enforce the law by encouraging vigilance to prevent a prohibited act

Question 15

How do the courts interpret statutes of strict liability? (1)

Answer 15

Courts must assume that men’s rea is required but be prepared if an act state an offence is one of strict liability.

Question 16

What are quasi crimes? (1)

Answer 16

Regulatory offences.

Question 17

What two defences are not available for strict liability offences? (2)

Answer 17

-due diligence
-defence of mistake

Question 18

What words indicate men’s rea? (4)

Answer 18

-knowingly
-intentionally
-maliciously
-permitting

Question 19

What case shows common law strict liability on account of outraging public indecency? (1)

Answer 19

Gibson and sylverine (1991)

Question 20

What case made the presumption of men’s rea of judges mandatory? (1)

Answer 20

Sweet v parsley (1969)

Question 21

What case did the gammon test arise from? (1)

Answer 21

Gammon (hong kong) 4a v attorney general of Hong Kong (1984)

Question 22

What occurred in R v G (2008)? (2)

Answer 22

The defendant, a 15 year old boy had consensual sex with a 12 year old girl (thought she was 15) he was held guilty of rape. Offences was one of strict liability even though it could lead to a custodial sentence.

Question 23

What is meant by due diligence? (1)

Answer 23

Where the defendant has done all that was within their power to not commit an offence.

Question 24

What occurred in the case of Sherras v de Rutzen (1895)? (2)

Answer 24

Defendant convicted of supplying alcohol to a constable on duty. Officer was not wearing arm band (sign off duty) the defendant was convicted but was quashed. Offence was not one of strict liability and genuine mistake provided defence.

Question 25

What is meant by no defence is mistake, in terms of strict liability? (1)

Answer 25

Defendant will still be guilty even though s/he made a genuine mistake.

Question 26

What are some examples of statutes of strict liability? (4)

Answer 26

-regulatory sale of food
-sale of alcohol and gaming tickets
-prevention of pollution
-safe use of vehicles

Question 27

What cases show no fault in terms of strict liability? (1)

Answer 27

Callow v Tillstone (1900)

Question 28

What is meant by no fault in terms of strict liability? (1)

Answer 28

A defendant can be convicted if their voluntary act inadvertently caused a prohibited consequence.

Question 29

What occurred in the case of alphacell Ltd v Woodward (1972)? (2)

Answer 29

Pumps at the defendants factory failed, causing pollutant to flood to the river. No proof of negligence. The defendant was guilty as case was one of strict liability.

Question 30

What are some cases where if due diligence to have been applied the defendant would not have been guilty? (1)

Answer 30

Harrow LBC v shah and shah (1999)

Question 31

What occurred in the case of B v DPP (2000)? (2)

Answer 31

The conviction of the defendant, a 15 year old boy for indicting a child under 14 to commit an act of gross indecency was quashed. Men’s Rea was required.

Question 32

What cases are quasi crimes? (5)

Answer 32

-callow v tillstone (1900) - food
-cunay v le cocq (1884) - alcohol
-gammon (1984) - building regulations
-harrow LBC v shah and shah (1999) - lottery tickets
-alpha cell Ltd v Woodward (1972) - pollution

Question 33

What occurred in the case of harrow LBC v she and shah (1999)? (2)

Answer 33

Defendant had told their staff to ask of proof of age, despite this a lottery ticket was sold to an underage boy, the defendant was guilty (strict liability case).

Question 34

What cases demonstrate absolute liability? (2)

Answer 34

R v larsonneur (1933)
Winzar v chief constable of Kent (1983)

Question 35

What occurred in the case callow v tillstone (1900)? (2)

Answer 35

A butcher sold meat that has been passed fit to sell by a vet, the butcher was guilty even though he was not at fault no defence of no fault.

Question 36

What occurred in the case of sweet v parsley (1969)? (2)

Answer 36

Tenants in a farm house owed by the defendant smoked cannabis there, landlord did not know. Defendant was not guilty as there was a presumption that men’s Rea was required.