Winzar v Chief Constable of Kent [1983]

1. Facts:

• Winzar, while intoxicated, was found in a hospital.

• Refused to leave when requested by hospital staff.

• Police were called and physically removed him from the hospital, placing him on a nearby highway.

• Charged with the offence of being "drunk on a highway.”

2. Outcome:

• Winzar was convicted of the offence.

• Court held that his voluntary or involuntary presence on the highway was immaterial.

• Key fact was that he was found drunk on the highway, which constituted the offence under the relevant statute.

3. Impact and Analysis:

• State of Affairs Offence: Case illustrates the principle that certain offences focus solely on the state of affairs rather than the individual's conduct or intent.

• Strict Liability: Emphasises that the mere existence of a prohibited state (being drunk in a public place) is sufficient for criminal liability.

• Fairness and Scope: Raises questions about fairness and the scope of criminal liability, particularly when the defendant's presence in the prohibited state was not entirely within their control.

• Legal Precedent: Reinforces the strict nature of certain status offences, where the circumstances leading to the state are irrelevant to the offence.