Your Cart

Blakely and Sutton v DPP 1991

Blakely and Sutton v DPP [1991] Crim LR 763 examined the mens rea (mental element) required for the offence of procuring. The central premise established was that the mens rea of procuring entails both the intention to perform the act that significantly contributed to the commission of the principal offence and actual knowledge of the risk that the principal offence would be committed as a result.


Blakely was having an affair with X. During an encounter at a pub, X expressed his intention to go home to his wife. Blakely's friend, Sutton, suggested adding alcohol to X's tonic water to prevent him from drinking and driving. However, X left before they could convey this advice, and X was subsequently found to be over the legal alcohol limit when driving. Both Blakely and Sutton were charged with procuring the offence.


The trial judge instructed the jury to convict if Blakely and Sutton were reckless as to whether X would commit the offence. They were convicted of procuring the offence on the basis that they had been reckless, following the definition of recklessness in R v Caldwell [1982]. The Divisional Court allowed the appeal, emphasising that the judge's direction could have led to a conviction based on the absence of any consideration by Blakely and Sutton regarding the risk that X might commit the offence.


The Court of Appeal eventually quashed their convictions, asserting that objective recklessness, as defined in Caldwell, was insufficient for liability. The court expressed the view that only intention should be considered as a basis for establishing liability in the context of procuring the offence. This decision clarified the requisite mental state for procuring, emphasising the importance of intention rather than relying solely on objective recklessness.


Justice McCullough, delivering the judgment, clarified that the mens rea of procuring requires both an intention to perform the act that significantly contributed to the commission of the principal offence and advertent recklessness. Advertent recklessness implies that the accused contemplated the risk that their act would or might bring about or assist in the commission of the principal offence but nonetheless proceeded to do it intentionally.


The judgment highlighted that inadvertent recklessness, where the accused gave no thought to the risk, is insufficient. The court also suggested that using the term "recklessness" in this context should be avoided to prevent confusion regarding the required mental state for procuring.


Check out our exam-focused Criminal Law notes now.


Subscribe to UOL Case Bank for more exclusive content and case summaries.

Featured Collection

UOLLB Features

UOLLB First Class Law Notes

Diagrams and Charts

Our carefully designed diagrams and charts will guide you through complex legal issues.

Clear and Succinct Definitions

Key concepts are concisely defined to help you understand legal topics quickly.

Statutory Provisions

Statutory provisions are provided side by side with legal concepts to help you swiftly locate the relevant legislation.

Case Summaries

We have summarised important cases for you so that you don't need to read long and boring cases.

Rules and Exceptions

Rules and exceptions are clearly listed so that you know when a rule applies and when it doesn't.

Terminology

Legal terms and key concepts are explained at the beginning of each chapter to help you learn efficiently.

Case Law

Case law is provided side by side with legal concepts so that you know how legal principles and precedents were established.

Law Essay Guide

You will learn essential law exam skills and essay writing techniques that are not taught in class.

Problem Question Guide

We will show you how to answer problem questions step by step to achieve first-class results.

Structured Explanations

Complex legal concepts are broken down into concise and digestible bullet point explanations.

Legal Research

You will learn legal research techniques with our study guide and become a proficient legal researcher.

Exam-focused

All essential concepts, principles, and case law are included so that you can answer exam questions quickly.