ABSTRACT

Whilst the law of theft requires proof of mens rea,2 it has long been recognised in this context that widespread effectiveness requires the imposition of strict criminal liability (see post, para 28.08). Consequently, since the Middle Ages there have been a series of such measures;3 and their scope was considerably enhanced as a result of the recommendations of the Molony Report in 1962,4 especially the Trade Descriptions Act 1968 (TDA: see post, para 4.02), the Fair Trading Act 1973 (see post, para 4.18) and the consumer safety legislation (see post, para 4.31). It will be noticed that the statutory arrangements for the enforcement by public authorities of these strict liability offences have a substantial degree of similarity (see Chapter 28) and that the authorities can obtain injunctions to prevent continued infringement by minor offences (see post, para 28.03). Further, the consumer terrorist who announces, eg, that baby food has been spiked, may commit blackmail5 or an offence under the Public Order Act 1986.6 On the civil side, Molony led to a number of consumer protection statutes;7 and there are also a number of mixed civil and criminal statutes.8