Leu Xing-Long v PP: Absolute Liability & Defence of Accident in Commercial Sex with Minor
Leu Xing-Long appealed to the High Court of Singapore against his conviction in the District Court for having commercial sex with a minor under 18, a violation of Section 376B(1) of the Penal Code. Leu's defense was that he reasonably believed the minor was of age. Chan Seng Onn J. dismissed the appeal, holding that Section 377D of the Penal Code makes a mistake as to the minor's age irrelevant for offenders above 21, effectively establishing absolute liability regarding the minor's age in such cases. The court found that the defense of accident under Section 80 of the Penal Code was inapplicable as it hinged on the same mistake of age.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeal regarding conviction for commercial sex with a minor. The court considered absolute liability and the defence of accident.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Conviction upheld | Won | Crystal Tan of Attorney-General’s Chambers Ramesh Ethan of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Leu Xing-Long | Appellant | Individual | Appeal dismissed | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Chan Seng Onn | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Crystal Tan | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Ramesh Ethan | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Terence Tan Li-Chern | Peter Low LLC |
| Christine Low | Peter Low LLC |
4. Facts
- The Appellant was convicted of having commercial sex with a minor under 18.
- The Appellant admitted to having sexual intercourse with the minor and paying $450 for her services.
- The Appellant claimed he took proper care to ascertain that she was above 18.
- The minor lied about her age and showed the Appellant her elder sister's identity card.
- The trial judge found that the defence of accident is inoperable in law for this offence.
- The trial judge found that the Appellant did not act with proper care and caution.
5. Formal Citations
- Leu Xing-Long v Public Prosecutor, Magistrate's Appeal No 110 of 2014, [2014] SGHC 193
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Judgment reserved. | |
| Decision Date |
7. Legal Issues
- Absolute Liability
- Outcome: The court held that Section 376B(1) is an offence of absolute liability for adult offenders concerning the age of the minor, due to Section 377D.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2013] 4 SLR 87
- [2009] 3 SLR(R) 873
- Defence of Accident
- Outcome: The court held that the defence of accident under Section 80 of the Penal Code was inapplicable as it hinged on the same mistake of age, which is excluded by Section 377D.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2008] 4 SLR(R) 306
- Mens Rea
- Outcome: The court held that the presumption of mens rea is displaced by statute for an offence under s 376B(1) with respect to the age of the minor.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [1998] SGHC 169
- [1986] SLR 168
- (1963) 29 MLJ 50
- [1970] AC 132
- [1985] 1 AC 1
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against conviction
9. Cause of Actions
- Commercial sex with a minor under 18
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Appeals
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M V Balakrishnan v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [1998] SGHC 169 | Singapore | Cited for the presumption that mens rea is an essential ingredient of an offence. |
| PP v Phua Keng Tong | N/A | Yes | [1986] SLR 168 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the presumption of mens rea may be displaced by statute. |
| Lim Chin Aik v R | Privy Council | Yes | (1963) 29 MLJ 50 | N/A | Cited for the principle that the presumption of mens rea may be displaced by statute. |
| Sweet v Parsley | House of Lords | Yes | [1970] AC 132 | N/A | Cited for the principle that the presumption of mens rea may be displaced by statute. |
| Gammon (Hong Kong) Ltd v Attorney General of Hong Kong | House of Lords | Yes | [1985] 1 AC 1 | Hong Kong | Cited for the principle that the presumption of mens rea can be displaced where the statute is concerned with an issue of social concern and public safety. |
| Buergin Juerg v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2013] 4 SLR 87 | Singapore | Cited to support the view that Section 377D(1) does not allow an accused to claim ignorance of the victim's age. |
| Tan Chye Hin v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2009] 3 SLR(R) 873 | Singapore | Cited to support the view that even if the accused checked the age of the minor and was given a good forgery of an identity document that showed she was above 18 years of age, this would only be a point relevant for mitigation and not exculpation. |
| Tan Chor Jin v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2008] 4 SLR(R) 306 | Singapore | Cited for the operation of Section 80 as an exception to criminal liability. |
| Rex v Ong Choon | Singapore Court of Criminal Appeal | Yes | [1938] MLJ 227 | Singapore | Cited for the definition of 'accident'. |
| Abdullah v R | N/A | Yes | [1954] MLJ 195 | N/A | Cited for the principle that what the law does not forbid, it allows. |
| State v Khora Ghasi | Orissa High Court | Yes | 1978 Cri LJ 1305 | N/A | Cited as a case example where either the defence of accident under s 80 or of mistake of fact under s 79 could apply. |
| R v City of Sault Ste Marie | N/A | Yes | (1978) 85 DLR (3d) | N/A | Cited for the argument against imposing liability without fault. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 376B(1) | Singapore |
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 80 | Singapore |
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 377D | Singapore |
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 79 | Singapore |
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 40(2) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Commercial sex
- Minor
- Mens rea
- Absolute liability
- Defence of accident
- Mistake of fact
- Proper care and caution
15.2 Keywords
- Commercial sex with minor
- Absolute liability
- Defence of accident
- Singapore law
- Criminal law
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Criminal Law | 90 |
| Sexual Offences | 90 |
| Commercial Sex | 80 |
| Statutory Interpretation | 70 |
| Evidence Law | 30 |
| Contract Law | 10 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Sexual Offences
- Statutory Interpretation