1989Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooksRequires access

Strict and Vicarious Liability

Marise Cremona

Open publisher page 6 citations

Abstract

Strict liability is the phrase used to refer to criminal offences which do not require mens rea in respect of one or more elements of the actus reus. The phrase ‘absolute liability’ is sometimes used, but this is misleading because it wrongly implies both that an offence possesses no fault element at all, and that it is not possible to plead a defence to such crimes. Strict liability is now regarded as the exception rather than the rule: there is often said to exist a ‘presumption of mens rea ’; however, this presumption is of relatively recent origin. The doctrine of mens rea evolved only gradually during the development of the common law, and the concept of subjective mens rea , which concentrates on the actual state of mind of the accused person, only developed once the accused was able to give evidence on his own behalf (the Criminal Evidence Act 1898: see Chapter 3.8).

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Strict liability is the phrase used to refer to criminal offences which do not require mens rea in respect of one or more elements of the actus reus. The phrase ‘absolute liability’ is sometimes used, but this is misleading because it wrongly implies both that an offence possesses no fault element at all, and that it is not possible to plead a defence to such crimes. Strict liability is now regarded as the exception rather than the rule: there is often said to exist a ‘presumption of mens rea ’; however, this presumption is of relatively recent origin. The doctrine of mens rea evolved only gradually during the development of the common law, and the concept of subjective mens rea , which concentrates on the actual state of mind of the accused person, only developed once the accused was able to give evidence on his own behalf (the Criminal Evidence Act 1898: see Chapter 3.8).

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 6 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Strict liability is the phrase used to refer to criminal offences which do not require mens rea in respect of one or more elements of the actus reus. The phrase ‘absolute liability’ is sometimes used, but this is misleading because it wrongly implies both that an offence possesses no fault element at all, and that it is not possible to plead a defence to such crimes. Strict liability is now regarded as the exception rather than the rule: there is often said to exist a ‘presumption of mens rea ’; however, this presumption is of relatively recent origin. The doctrine of mens rea evolved only gradually during the development of the common law, and the concept of subjective mens rea , which concentrates on the actual state of mind of the accused person, only developed once the accused was able to give evidence on his own behalf (the Criminal Evidence Act 1898: see Chapter 3.8).

Key concepts: Mens rea, Vicarious liability, Presumption, Strict liability, Doctrine, Liability, Law, Phrase

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Strict and Vicarious Liability — Research Paper | ScholarLens