Critically analyse Williams' statement in light of the English Criminal Law on Strict Liability

This essay hasn't yet been marked by one of our teachers

You can view 2 essays on Criminal law that have been Marked by Teachers

The first 200 words of this essay...

Jade Chu

204042

LLB 1st Year

Criminal Law

Dr Prabha Kotiswaran

Critically analyse Williams' statement in light of the English Criminal Law on Strict Liability.

Glanville Williams's observation on the ambiguities of strict liability appreciates the consequences of conflicting authorities, obfuscating any coherent principle. Strict liability offences are those that do not require the establishment of mens rea as to one of more elements in the actus reus; the defendant may be oblivious to the circumstances or consequences. The words used in a statute can be construed to amount to a strict liability offence depending on the judge's interpretation of these terms, which can evidently result in a conflict of opinions. However such an interpretation is not limited to statutory terms, a number of influential principals are evident. In this critical analysis I will consider the presumption of mens rea and the effects of expressed words on this presumption, illustrating that the interpretation of these terms can be inconsistent. Furthermore I will illustrate the inference of strict liability in relation to the whether the offence is termed to be a 'real' or 'quasi' crime, if the statute provision is of general or special application,