C.C. -v- Ireland & Ors [2005] IESC 48 (12 July 2005)

C.C. -v- Ireland & Ors [2005] IESC 48 (12 July 2005)

Section 1(1) of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1935 does not expressly or by necessary implication exclude the requirement of mens rea; therefore, an honest and reasonable mistake as to the age of the complainant is a defence to a charge under this section. The presumption of mens rea is not ousted, and the exclusion of such a defence would be inconsistent with constitutional principles of due process.

Citation
[2005] IESC 48
Parties
Applicant/appellant: C. C.; Applicant/appellant: P. G.; Respondent: Ireland; Respondent: The Attorney General; Respondent: The Director of Public Prosecutions
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
12 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Appeal (from High Court, Judicial Review) / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Mens Rea, Strict Liability, Statutory Interpretation, Sexual Offences Against Minors, Mistake of Fact as Defence, Constitutionality of Criminal Statutes
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Mens Rea Strict Liability Statutory Interpretation Sexual Offences Against Minors Mistake of Fact as Defence Constitutionality of Criminal Statutes

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C. C.

Applicant/appellant

P. G.

Applicant/appellant

Ireland

Respondent

The Attorney General

Respondent

The Director of Public Prosecutions

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal (from High Court, Judicial Review) / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s.1(1) of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1935 creates an offence of strict liability or requires proof of mens rea
  2. 2 Whether a defence of honest and reasonable mistake as to age is available to a charge under s.1(1) of the 1935 Act
  3. 3 Whether exclusion of such a defence is repugnant to the Constitution

Ratio Decidendi

Section 1(1) of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1935 does not expressly or by necessary implication exclude the requirement of mens rea; therefore, an honest and reasonable mistake as to the age of the complainant is a defence to a charge under this section. The presumption of mens rea is not ousted, and the exclusion of such a defence would be inconsistent with constitutional principles of due process.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Declaration that a defence of honest and reasonable mistake as to age is available under s.1(1) of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1935
  • Remit to trial court for proceedings consistent with this interpretation