Criminal law – Mens rea. The judge had not erred in ruling that proof of an offence contrary to reg 30(1)(g) of the Welfare of Animals at the Time of Killing Regulations 2015, SI 2015/1782, did not require the prosecution to prove mens rea on the part of the business operator and the prosecution had not been required to prove a culpable act and/or omission on the part of the business operator when prosecuted for offences alleged to be contrary to the Regulations. Accordingly, the Divisional Court dismissed the claimant's application for judicial review.