Maulidi v. R. Crim. App. 591-D-70; 23/10/70; Biron, J.

Maulidi v. R. Crim. App. 591-D-70; 23/10/70; Biron, J.

The appellant was convicted of failure to prepare and maintain records of oral contracts in respect of his employees, failure to insure in respect of liability to his employees, failure to insure to pay minimum wages. Evidence established that the appellant who owned a bar paid his barmaids Shs. 60/- per month whereas the minimum wage was Shs. 170/- per month. The appellant pleaded ignorance as to requirement of having employees insured or contracts made out for them. The plea was rejected on the ground that ignorance of law does not excuse.

            Held: (1) “Apart from the finding on the facts that the appellant did know the law, I am inclined to the view that these statutory offences are absolute, and no mens rea is required, even so it is pointed that there is no such presumption that everybody is presumed to know the law. In fact, I very much doubt if such presumption would hold good of even those who administer the law. The principle is that ignorance of the law does not afford a defence which, as the magistrate will appreciate, is no the same as presuming that everyone knows the law.” (2) There is no merit in the appeal (3) Appeal dismissed.