1052 (b) failure to provide adequate systems for conveying relevant information to relevant persons in the body corporate. Mistake of fact (strict liability) 55.—(1) A body corporate can only rely on section 35 (mistake of fact (strict liability)) in respect of conduct that would, apart from this section, constitute an offence on its part if— (a) (b) the employee, agent or officer of the body corporate who carried out the conduct was under a mistaken but reasonable belief about facts that, had they existed, would have meant that the conduct would not have constituted an offence; and the body corporate proves that it exercised due diligence to prevent the conduct. (2) A failure to exercise due diligence may be evidenced by the fact that the prohibited conduct was substantially attributable to— (a) (b) inadequate corporate management, control or supervision of the conduct of one or more of its employees, agents or officers; or failure to provide adequate systems for conveying relevant information to relevant persons in the body corporate. Intervening conduct or event 56. A body corporate cannot rely on section 39 (intervening conduct or event) in respect of a physical element of an offence brought about by another person if the other person is an employee, agent or officer of the body corporate. PART 9 — PROOF OF CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY Legal burden of proof—prosecution 57.—(1) The prosecution bears a legal burden of proving every element of an offence relevant to the guilt of the person charged. (2) The prosecution also bears a legal burden of disproving any matter in relation to which the defendant has discharged an evidential burden of proof imposed on the defendant. (3) In this Decree— “legal burden” , in relation to a matter, means the burden of proving the existence of the matter. Standard of proof—prosecution 58.—(1) A legal burden of proof on the prosecution must be discharged beyond reasonable doubt. (2) Sub-section (1) does not apply if the law creating the offence specifies a different standard of proof. 59.—(1) only. Evidential burden of proof—defence Subject to section 60, a burden of proof that a law imposes on a defendant is an evidential burden (2) A defendant who wishes to deny criminal responsibility by relying on a provision of this Decree (other than section 28) bears an evidential burden in relation to that matter. (3) A defendant who wishes to rely on any exception, exemption, excuse, qualification or justification provided by the law creating an offence bears an evidential burden in relation to that matter. (4) The exception, exemption, excuse, qualification or justification need not accompany the description of the offence. (5) The defendant no longer bears the evidential burden in relation to a matter if evidence sufficient to discharge the burden is adduced by the prosecution or by the court. (6) The question whether an evidential burden has been discharged is one of law.