St Regis Paper Company Ltd v R. País/Territorio Reino Unido Tipo de la corte Nacional - corte superior Fecha Nov 4, 2011 Fuente UNEP, InforMEA Nombre del tribunal Court of Appeal Sede de la corte London Juez Moses, Davis and Gilbert. Número de referencia [2011] EWCA Crim 2527 Idioma Inglés Materia Cuestiones jurídicas, Medio ambiente gen. Palabra clave Sustancias peligrosas Responsabilidad/indemnización Acceso-a-la-información Resumen 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 Texto completo COU-159752.pdf