St Regis Paper Company Ltd v R. Country/Territory United Kingdom Type of court National - higher court Date Nov 4, 2011 Source UNEP, InforMEA Court name Court of Appeal Seat of court London Judge Moses, Davis and Gilbert. Reference number [2011] EWCA Crim 2527 Language English Subject Environment gen., Legal questions Keyword Hazardous substances Liability/compensation Access-to-information Abstract This appeal raises the issue as to the extent which the appellant, St. Regis Paper Company Limited (St. Regis), could be held criminally liable for intentionally making a false entry in a record required for environmental pollution control. The Court of Appeal considered whether the guilty intention of a technical manager in falsifying records for an environmental permit (contrary to Regulation 32(1)(g) of the Pollution Prevention and Control (England and Wales) Regulations 2000 SI 2000/1973) and for which he had been convicted could be attributed to the company with the result that the company was guilty of an offence which required mens rea. The conventional rule is that the company could only be found liable for offences which required proof of mens rea in cases where the controlling officers had the relevant guilty intention. The question for the jury would be whether those who had committed the offence with the requisite intention constituted the ‘directing mind and will of the corporation (Tesco Supermarket v Nattrass [1972] AC 153). The Court of Appeal held that as a matter of statutory construction, Regulation 32(1)(g) of the PPC Regulations could not be interpreted as justifying a departure from the traditional rule there were a number of offences under Regulation 32 which were strict liability and did not require mens rea, so the Regulation would not be ‘emasculated by application of the traditional rule. Nor was it open to the jury to conclude on the facts that the technical manager was the controlling mind and will of the company Full text COU-159752.pdf