Watch the video and then discuss the advice you would offer before comparing your ideas with those suggested.

Suggestions

  • Strict liability crimes are crimes which require no proof of mens rea in relation to one or more aspects of the actus reus. Strict liability offences are mainly regulatory in nature. Strict liability in criminal law is controversial as it means a person may be liable for an offence where they are not at fault or have taken all reasonable care to ensure compliance with the law - Callow v Tillstone. However, the harshness of strict liability in criminal law is generally tolerated as it brings practical benefits and is often used to provide a greater level of protection to the public in areas where it is perceived that there is a need to provide such protection.
  • As strict liability has the potential to create injustice and operate harshly there is a general presumption that mens rea is required to impose criminal liability.

According to Gammon, this presumption may be rebutted where:

  1. The crime is regulatory as opposed to a true crime; or
  2. The crime is one of social concern; or
  3. The wording of the Act indicates strict liability; or
  4. The offence carries a small penalty.