R v Dixon

Rex v. Dixon, 3 M. & S. 11 (K.B. 1814), was a case decided by the King's Bench that held that a person could not be convicted of selling impure foods unless he knew of the impurities.

Subsequent history

The case was later overruled in Regina v. Woodrow, which abolished the mens rea requirement of Rex v. Dixon.[1]

gollark: It's time you could spend NOT doing that!
gollark: > why would you be tired of being muslim lolWell, it requires you to do things and not do other things, primarily.
gollark: No, I mean that's my guesses for why you do.
gollark: So peer pressure.
gollark: Yes, exactly.

References
  1. Bonnie, R.J. et al. Criminal Law, Second Edition. Foundation Press, New York, NY: 2004, p. 252
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.