To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

R v Stephens
CourtQueen's Bench Division
Full case nameThe Queen or The Crown against (most formally Regina versus) Stephens
Decided14 June 1866[1]
Citation(s)LR 1 QB 702, QBD
Court membership
Judge(s) sittingMr Justice Mellor; Mr Justice Blackburn
Keywords
  • Master and Servant (employer and employee)
  • Master liable on Indictment for act of Servant
  • Knowledge of employee imputed to employer
[1]

R v Stephens (1866) is an English criminal law, public nuisance in land law and vicarious liability case decided by the Queen's Bench that applied a strict liability standard (that is no requirement of mens rea) to the violation of the criminal statute prohibiting dumping of refuse into a river.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/3
    Views:
    12 620
    22 774
    406
  • Regina (Queen) v. Dudley and Stephens
  • The Lifeboat Case (Lecture 1 & 2)
  • R v Dudley & Stephens (1884)

Transcription

Facts

The defendant owned a quarry where refuse was dumped (by servants, employees, agents, land licensees or subcontractors) into a nearby river. The owner claimed he had no knowledge of the dumping and so should not be liable.

Judgment

The court held the quarry owner as "master" would be liable for acts of his servant, regardless of knowledge. He was convicted and faced the usual financial penalty. The offence was upheld as being one where no knowledge of the dumping was required.[2]

References

  1. ^ a b Index Card - case preview Incorporated Council of Law Reporting
  2. ^ Bonnie, R.J. et al. Criminal Law, Second Edition. Foundation Press, New York, NY: 2004, p. 252

Considered in

  • R v Rimmington [2005] UKHL 63; [2006] 1 AC 459; [2005] 3 WLR 982; [2006] 2 All ER 257; [2006] 1 Cr App R 257, HL(E)
  • R v Shorrock [1994] QB 279
This page was last edited on 18 December 2022, at 16:51
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.