Strict liability
Produced in partnership with Christopher Sykes of 33 Chancery Lane
Practice notesStrict liability
Produced in partnership with Christopher Sykes of 33 Chancery Lane
Practice notesStrict liability applies to offences for which the prosecution is not required to prove mens rea for one or more elements of the offence. What the defendant knew, believed, or intended is unlikely to be relevant. Guilt can therefore be established by the commission of an act regardless of mindset.
Strict liability runs against the presumption that criminal offences require proof of both actus reus and mens rea. Wright J in Sherras v De Rutzen stated:
鈥�There is a presumption that mens rea, an evil intention, or a knowledge of the wrongfulness of the act, is an essential ingredient in every offence; but that presumption is liable to be displaced either by the words of the statute creating the offence or by the subject-matter with which it deals, and both must be considered.鈥�
Strict liability is generally intended to regulate conduct that is particularly harmful to society. Societal protection overrides the presumption that the prosecution must prove mens rea.
Strict liability offences focus more on factual consequences than the mindset
To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it,
sign-in with 桔子视频 or register for a free trial.