Plain language law

New Zealand law explained for everyone

Building Act 2004

Miscellaneous provisions - Other offences and criminal proceedings - Proceedings for offences generally

388: Strict liability and defences

You could also call this:

“You can be found guilty of breaking this law even if you didn't mean to, but you can defend yourself if you had a good reason.”

When someone breaks the Building Act 2004, they don’t need to have meant to do it to be in trouble. This means you can get in trouble even if you didn’t mean to break the rules.

However, you can defend yourself if you can prove certain things. You might not be in trouble if you had to break the rules to save someone’s life or health, or to stop serious damage to property. But for this to work, you need to show that what you did was reasonable, and that you fixed any problems afterwards.

You can also defend yourself if something happened that you couldn’t control, like a natural disaster, a machine breaking down, or someone trying to cause trouble on purpose. But you need to show that you couldn’t have known it would happen or stopped it, and that you fixed any problems afterwards.

This text is automatically generated. It might be out of date or be missing some parts. Find out more about how we do this.

View the original legislation for this page at https://legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0120/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM309040.

Topics:

Housing and property > Home safety and repairs

Crime and justice > Criminal law

387: Liability for acts of employees or agents of Crown organisations, or

“A Crown organisation can be held responsible when its workers do something wrong, but has ways to defend itself.”

389: Fines to be paid to territorial authority or regional authority instituting prosecution, or

“Money from fines for breaking this law goes to the local council that started the court case.”

Part 5 Miscellaneous provisions
Other offences and criminal proceedings: Proceedings for offences generally

388Strict liability and defences

Except as otherwise provided in this Act, in a prosecution for an offence of contravening or permitting a contravention of this Act, it is not necessary to prove that the defendant intended to commit the offence.
It is a defence in any prosecution that is referred to in subsection (1) if the defendant proves—
that all of the following circumstances apply:
1. the action or event to which the prosecution relates was necessary for the purposes of saving or protecting life or health, or preventing serious damage to property; and
2. the conduct of the defendant was reasonable in the circumstances; and
3. the effects of the action or event were adequately mitigated or remedied by the defendant after it occurred; or
that the action or event to which the prosecution relates was due to an event beyond the control of the defendant, including natural disaster, mechanical failure, or sabotage, and in each case—
1. the action or event could not reasonably have been foreseen or been provided against by the defendant; and
2. the effects of the action or event were adequately mitigated or remedied by the defendant after it occurred.

Compare