|
POA - Strict Liability. Canadian Pacific Railway Company v. Teamsters Canada Rail Conference
In Canadian Pacific Railway Company v. Teamsters Canada Rail Conference (Fed CA, 2024) the Federal Court of Appeal allowed an appeal from a finding of civil contempt, here in relation to a railway labour arbitration award.
Here the court distinguishes mens rea, and strict and abolute liability:Strict liability, absolute liability, and mens rea offences
[28] The point of departure for the analysis begins with an understanding of the differences between mens rea offences (or "“true criminal offences”"), strict liability offences, and absolute liability offences. The guiding authority on this remains: R. v. Sault Ste. Marie, [1978] 2 S.C.R. 1299, 1978 CanLII 11 (SCC) at 1325-1326 [Sault Ste. Marie]:(i) true criminal offences, "“in which mens rea, consisting of some positive state of mind such as intent, knowledge, or recklessness, must be proved by the prosecution”";
(ii) strict liability offences, "“in which there is no necessity for the prosecution to prove the existence of mens rea; the doing of the prohibited act prima facie imports the offence, leaving it open to the accused to avoid liability by proving that he took all reasonable care”";
(iii) absolute liability offences, in which "“it is not open to the accused to exculpate himself by showing that he was free of fault”".
|
