Blakely and Sutton v DPP [1991]

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.
Back to blog
UOL Case Bank

UOL Case Bank

Upon joining, you become a valuable UOL student and gain instant access to over 2,100 case summaries. UOL Case Bank is constantly expanding. Speed up your revision with us now.

Subscribe Now

Where are our students from?

Yale University
Council of Europe
Baker Mckenzie 
University of Chicago
Columbia University
New York University
University of Michigan 
University College London (UCL)
London School of Economics (LSE)
King’s College London (KCL)
University of London
University of Manchester
University of Zurich
University of York
Brandeis University
University of Exeter
University of Sheffield
Boston University
University of Washington
University of Leeds
University of Law
Royal Holloway, University of London 
Birkbeck, University of London
SOAS, University of London
University of Kent
University of Hull
Queen’s University Belfast
Toronto Metropolitan University
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
University of Buckingham

  • Criminal Practice

    Diagrams and Charts

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

  • Criminal Law

    Clear and Succinct Definitions

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

  • Property Law

    Statutory Provisions

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

  • Public Law

    Case Summaries

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

  • Evidence

    Rules and Exceptions

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

  • Company Law


    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 Exam Guide

    Law Essay Guide

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

  • Law Exam Guide

    Problem Question Guide

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

  • Conflict of Laws

    Structured Explanations

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

  • Legal System and Method

    Legal Research

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

  • Jurisprudence and Legal Theory


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