Strict Liability Cases - Criminal Law - Digestible Notes

Strict Liability Cases

Subjects | Law Notes | Criminal Law

• B (A Minor) v DPP [2000] 2 AC 428
• Belfon, R v [1976] 1 WLR 741
• Harrrow London BC v Shah [2000] CRIM LR 692
• R v K [2001] UKHL 41

Subscribe on YouTube

I help people navigate their law degrees

🎓 Simple and digestible information on studying law effectively.

🎬 One new video every week (I accept requests and reply to everything!)

📚 FREE courses, content, and other exciting giveaways.

Click to Subscribe

B (A Minor) v DPP [2000] 2 AC 428

Facts: A boy aged 14 was charged with an offence of inciting a child under 14 to commit an act of gross indecency, contrary to section 1(1) of the Indecency with Children Act 1960. He had sat next to a 13 year old girl on a bus and repeatedly asked her to perform oral sex with him. She refused. The boy believed the girl was over 14. The Trial judge ruled that a mistake of fact could not constitute a defence, so was found guilty of a criminal offence. He appealed.

Held: On appeal, the House of Lords reversed the decision. The House of Lords found that is necessary for the prosecution to prove the absence of a genuine belief (not necessarily a reasonable belief) on the part of the defendant that the victim was 14 or over. The House of Lords found that mens rea is an essential ingredient unless Parliament has indicated a contrary intention either expressly or by necessary implication (that the offence is one of strict liability). See notes on strict liability, here.

R v Belfon [1976] 1 WLR 741

Facts: The defendant (D), and an accomplice, wounded some victims with intent. D then attacked those who came to help a girl he had pushed to the ground. He slashed one man with a razor, causing severe wounds to his head and chest.

Held: He had certainly foreseen the risk of such consequences, but it had not been proved that he had the specific intent required for the more serious offence.

The Art of Getting a First in Law - ONLY £4.99

FOOL-PROOF methods of obtaining top grades

SECRETS your professors won't tell you and your peers don't know

INSIDER TIPS and tricks so you can spend less time studying and land the perfect job

We work really hard to provide you with incredible law notes for free...

The proceeds of this eBook helps us to run the site and keep the service FREE!

Harrrow London BC v Shah [2000] Crim LR 692

Facts: The defendant (D) was convicted of selling a lottery ticket to a person under the age of 16, even though he was not aware that the purchaser was under 16 nor was it obvious that the person was under that age.

R v K [2001] UKHL 41

Facts: K, a 26 year old man, was charged under s.14(1) Sexual Offences Act 1956 with indecent assault on a girl of 14. His defence was that the sexual activity was consensual and that she had told him she was 16 and that he had had no reason to disbelieve her.

Held: A defendant is entitled to be acquitted of sexual assault under s.14(1) if he has an honest belief that the girl was over 16. There is no requirement that the defendant had reasonable grounds for his belief. The court affirmed the principle that there is a presumption against strict liability, where the statute is silent, and in favour of mens rea.

Law Application Masterclass - ONLY £9.99

Learn how to effortlessly land vacation schemes, training contracts, and pupillages by making your law applications awesome. This eBook is constructed by lawyers and recruiters from the world's leading law firms and barristers' chambers.

✅ 60+ page eBook

✅ Research Methods, Success Secrets, Tips, Tricks, and more!

✅ Help keep Digestible Notes FREE

Check out with PayPal

About Us

Digestible Notes was created with a simple objective: to make learning simple and accessible. We believe that human potential is limitless if you're willing to put in the work.

© 2026 Digestible Notes All Rights Reserved.

Our Socials

Say Hello

Name Email Message