IS IT A STRICT LIABILITY OFFENCE?

• Strict liability offences created by an Act of Parliament won't contain any requiring mens rea in their definition, however, the courts will still look at a number of factors before deciding that a statutory offence is one of strict liability
• If the Act doesn't make it clear that mens rea is not required, judges will look for words in an Act of Parliament that indicate mens rea (e.g. 'knowingly' 'intentionally') If here are no such words, judges will still presume that all criminal offences require mens rea. This was made clear in Sweet v Parsley (1969)
• SWEET v PARSLEY (1969) - Tenants in a farmhouse owned by the defendant smoke cannabis in there. The landlord didn't know. Defendant wasn't guilty as there was presumption that mens rea was required.
• GAMMON v ATTORNEY GENERAL OF HONG KONG (1984) - the court needed to decide whether:

  • It had to be proved that the defendants knew that their deviations from planned building works was material OR
  • the offence was one of strict liability so their knowledge was irrelevant