Subscribers are able to see a list of all the cited cases and legislation of a document. Both these offences carry the same maximum sentence (two years imprisonment, a fine or both) for conviction after trial on indictment. The defendant was charged with serving an on-duty police officer with liquor. . 44 terms. Misspossiblyright. All staff were told not to sell any lottery ticket to anyone under 16 and to check ID's. one of the staff sold a ticket to a 13- year-old boy. The defendant (15) repeatedly asked a girl (13) on the bus to perform oral sex on him. AQA Law AS Unit 2 Criminal Law Cases. Victor Joffe (Forsters) for the applicants; Paul Emerson (Jules Cantor) for the liquidator. An example of this is the Contempt of Court Act 1981 where s 1 sets out the strict liability rule. A shop keeper was held liable even though it . Facts. One of their staff sold a lottery ticket to a 13-year-old boy without asking for proof of age. This subsection does not, include any words indicating either that mens rea is required or that it is, not, nor does it contain any provision for the defence of due diligence. In the c 29 terms. He, believed she was over the age of 14. Harrow LBC v Shah and Shah 1999. HL stated that if reasonable people would regard the matter as something which the defendant had done, despite whether he or she knew of his or her actions, then mens rea is not required. In the case of Alphacell v Woodward [1972], the defendants of a company were accused of causing pollution to a river. The salesman mistakenly believed the boy was over 16 years. This section makes it an offence for a licensed person to supply any liquor or refreshment to any constable on duty. Day J justified his decision in Sherras by pointing to the fact that although s 16(2) did not include the word knowingly, s 16(1) did, for the offence of knowingly harbours or knowingly suffers to remain on his premises any constable during any part of the time appointed for such constable being on duty. Greenwich Ltd v National Westminster Bank plc and ors; Ch D (Blackburne J) 31 Mar 1999. smedleys v breed 1974 case summary - aidarfagundes.com.br National Distributing Company uses a periodic inventory system to track its merchandise inventory and the gross profit method to estimate ending inventory and cost of goods sold for interim periods. AN OFFENCE of selling a lottery ticket to a person who had not attained the age of 16 years contrary to s 13 of the National Lottery Act 1993 and reg 3 of the National Lottery Regulations 1994 was an offence of strict liability and it was therefore unnecessary for the prosecution to prove that a person charged with such an offence knew or was reckless as to the age of the customer. The defendant was taken on a stretcher to hospital, but upon examination he was found to be drunk not ill. 2023 vLex Justis Limited All rights reserved, VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. One of the staff sold one to a 13 year old without asking for ID. Although the courts start with the presumption that mens rea is required, they look at a variety of points to decide whether the presumption should stand or if it can be displaced and the offence made one of strict liability. Callow v Tillstone 1900. 3) The presumption is particularly strong where the offence is of truly criminal character. However, a defendant can be convicted if his voluntary act inadvertently caused a prohibited consequence. -punctuation helps create meaning - lack of it can be a problem.
Spotsylvania Regional Medical Center Er Wait Time,
Stand At Attention And Salute,
Juneteenth Colors Red Yellow Green,
Does Joyce Meyer Have Cancer,
Articles H
