Law Society of Ontario (LSO) Paralegal Practice Exam

What defines a strict liability offence?

1. The prosecution must prove a guilty mind beyond a reasonable doubt

2. Burden of proof lies with the defendant only

3. Only the act needs to be proven, not the intent

4. Prosecution proves act, then defendant must show reasonable steps

The correct answer is: Prosecution proves act, then defendant must show reasonable steps

A strict liability offence is characterized by the requirement that only the actus reus, or the act itself, needs to be proven by the prosecution, while the defendant can be given an opportunity to introduce a defense. This is often a defense of "due diligence," where the defendant can demonstrate that they took reasonable steps to prevent the offence from occurring. In strict liability cases, the absence of a guilty mind, or mens rea, distinguishes them from more serious offences where intention or knowledge is critical. The prosecution's role is limited to establishing that the act occurred, and once that is established, the onus shifts to the defendant to demonstrate that they exercised reasonable care or took appropriate measures to avoid the unlawful act. This framework promotes public safety and regulatory compliance while balancing the interests of justice by allowing defendants to defend themselves if they can show they acted responsibly. This structure is beneficial in regulatory offences where societal interests dictate a need for compliance without necessitating proof of intent, thereby streamlining the enforcement of laws meant to protect the public.