“Actus reus can be satisfied by omission where legal duty to act exists”
Speck was a company director who failed to comply with statutory requirements under company law. He omitted to file required documentation and failed to perform duties imposed by statute. The prosecution argued this omission constituted the actus reus of the offence.
Whether an omission to act could constitute the actus reus of a criminal offence where there was a statutory duty to act.
The court held that the defendant's omission satisfied the actus reus requirement. The failure to perform a legal duty constituted sufficient conduct for criminal liability.
This case clarifies the fundamental principle that actus reus encompasses both acts and omissions where legal duties exist. It's essential for understanding how criminal liability can arise from failures to act, particularly in regulatory contexts.
You're reading the free summary of Actus reus — R v Speck. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.
No card required. Free forever.
OSCOLA Citation
R v Speck [1977] 2 All ER 859
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Falls back to Google for old citations BAILII catalogues separately
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.