Knowledge (legal construct)
 | The examples and perspective in this article deal primarily with English law and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. (April 2023) |
In law, knowledge is one of the degrees of mens rea that constitute part of a crime. For example, in English law, the offence of knowingly being a passenger in a vehicle taken without consent (TWOC) requires that the prosecution prove not only that the defendant was a passenger in a vehicle and that it was taken by the driver without consent, but also that the defendant knew that it was taken without consent.[1]
The mens rea of knowledge refers to knowledge about certain facts rather than "of the law is". It is "a positive belief that a state of affairs exists".[2]
Knowledge can be actual, constructive, or imputed.[3]
Actual knowledge
[edit]A defendant does not have actual knowledge if they believe something to the contrary. The standard is subjective and the belief of the defendant need not be reasonable, only honest.[4] For example, in R v. Williams[5] the defendant intervened in what he thought was a mugging but was in fact a citizen's arrest. His mistake was upheld as a defence against a charge of assault. In Beckford v. R[6] the defendant was a police officer who shot and killed V. Beckford claimed that he believed that V was shooting at him. It was found that the correct test was whether D "honestly believed" facts which, if true, would establish a defence. The reasonableness of the belief would be evidential in finding whether it was truly believed.
Constructive knowledge
[edit]Knowledge is also found where a defendant suspects that circumstances exist and "deliberately decides not to make any further enquiries" in case his suspicions prove well founded.[4] A common example is a person who purchases significantly inexpensive and unprovenanced but desirable items from a stranger. Such a person is likely to be fixed with constructive knowledge that the items were stolen.[7]
Imputed knowledge
[edit]This is relevant in strict liability offences and in corporate crime. For example, if a bar manager delegates his duties to others and those others know of unlawful activities on the premises, the manager can be fixed with imputed knowledge of the unlawful activities.[8]
References
[edit]- ^ Theft Act 1968, s.12
- ^ Herring (2004) p.170
- ^ Graves, Charles Tait (2024). "Intentionality in Trade Secret Law". Berkeley Technology Law Journal. 39 (2): 721–781. doi:10.15779/Z38000018N – via Academic Search Complete.
- ^ a b Herring (2004) p.171
- ^ [1987] 3 All ER 411, CA (England)
- ^ [1987] 3 All ER 425, (UK Privy Council)
- ^ Anderton v. Ryan [1985] AC 560, HL (England)
- ^ Ferguson v. Weaving [1951] 1 All ER 412 (England)
Bibliography
[edit]- Herring, J. (2004). Criminal Law: Text, Cases, and Materials. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 170–172. ISBN 0-19-876578-9.
 | This legal term article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |