Where the D intends to commit a similar offence against one person but instead commits is against another. Must be the same or similar - Latimer.
Where the D intends to commit a different offence against one person but instead commits another - HLBC v Shah
Where the D intends to commit a similar offence against one person but instead commits is against another. Don't have to be the same or similar - Latimer.
7. What happens if it is not clear is an offence is strict liability?
Court will presume mens rea is required - HLBC v Shah.
Court will presume mens rea is required - Sweet v Parsley.
Court will presume mens rea is not required - Sweet v Parsley.
8. What is the coincidence rule?
In order for D to be guilty of offence, AR and MR must happen at same time - Fagan v MPC
Where D is guilty of an offence simply for committing the AR not the MR. - Larsonneur
In order for D to be guilty of offence, AR and MR must happen at different times. - Latimer
Where the D knows there is a risk but takes it anyway - Cunningham
9. What is strict liability?
Where the D is guilty of an offence for just committing the AR, no need for MR - HLBC v Shah.
Where the AR and MR have to happen at the same time.
Where the D is guilty of an offence just for having the MR - Larsonneur.
10. Reasons against strict liability?
Makes people who are not blameworthy guilty of an offence, even if all possible care has been taken - HLBC v Shah.
Protects society, promotes greater care in public safety - Alphacell v Woodward.