Strict liability and the mens rea of cartel crime

This article argues against the current strict liability approach of the cartel offence by presenting a case for the introduction of a mens rea of cartel crime. The cartel offence is presented as a serious and normatively stigmatic crime which requires a mens rea if fair criminalisation is to occur. A mens rea of intention is presented as the ideal candidate and the applicability of intention is explored. The issue of omission in the cartel context is also addressed and this in turn leads to a call for the creation of a new offence of failing to report cartel activity to the competition authority

The convergence of past and present challenges to the criminal cartel law of the UK

Evaluates the criminal cartel offence under the Enterprise Act 2002, both as originally enacted and following the reforms made by the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013. Comments on the defence whereby a defendant may claim that the agreement was disclosed in advance to professional legal advisers for the purpose of obtaining advice. Assesses how effective the Competition and Markets Authority may prove in enforcing the offence

On reforming the mental element of the cartel offence

This article assesses the mental element of the Irish cartel offence and argues that a mens rea of intention is required if the offence is to function properly. It is argued that the current strict liability regime governing the cartel offence is unjustified and sacrifices too many non-consequentalist concerns in favour of dubious claims of fostering greater deterrence. After highlighting the application of both direct and oblique intention, the article argues against inferring a mens rea into the cartel offence. Rather, a redrafting of the cartel offence is called for

The criminalisation of corporate psychopaths: a holistic inquiry

The destructive harm caused by corporate psychopaths has become an area of considerable interest to medical professionals, lawyers and philosophers. This paper analyses contemporary research forwarded by these distinct groups in order to determine if, in light of current scientific knowledge on this mental disorder, corporate psychopaths can be held fully responsible for their crimes, and if so, on what basis? In combining the often-disparate conclusions reached by the above groups in relation to the criminalisation of corporate psychopaths, this paper makes a significant contribution to the field by presenting novel methods of holding corporate psychopaths morally culpable for their crimes, as previous research of this kind has focused on clinical psychopaths, who tend to be involved in violent offences.</p

On reforming the mental element of the cartel offence

This article assesses the mental element of the Irish cartel offence and argues that a mens rea of intention is required if the offence is to function properly. It is argued that the current strict liability regime governing the cartel offence is unjustified and sacrifices too many non-consequentalist concerns in favour of dubious claims of fostering greater deterrence. After highlighting the application of both direct and oblique intention, the article argues against inferring a mens rea into the cartel offence. Rather, a redrafting of the cartel offence is called for

Strict liability and the mens rea of cartel crime

This article argues against the current strict liability approach of the cartel offence by presenting a case for the introduction of a mens rea of cartel crime. The cartel offence is presented as a serious and normatively stigmatic crime which requires a mens rea if fair criminalisation is to occur. A mens rea of intention is presented as the ideal candidate and the applicability of intention is explored. The issue of omission in the cartel context is also addressed and this in turn leads to a call for the creation of a new offence of failing to report cartel activity to the competition authority