Burglary A02

HideShow resource information
View mindmap
  • Burglary
    • The Theft Act 1986 does not define key elements of the offence of burglary
      • no definition of 'entry', 'trespasser', or 'part of a building'
        • Entry: changed through cases
          • Collins (1972)- an effective and substantial enrty
          • Brown (1985) - effective enrty
          • Ryan (1996) - CA did not seem to follow need for effective enrty
      • 'Building' only party defined
      • This has created difficulty in some cases and inconsistent decisions, especially on what is meant by 'entry'
      • Lack of definitions means that the courts have had to decide what the Act was meant to cover.
      • trespasser - civil law term
    • Is the law protecting people or property?
      • Under 9(1)(a) the defendant need only intend some damage (even slight) to be guilty
        • Yet so far as injuring a person is concerned, the prosecution must prove intention to cause GBH
    • Decision in Smith and Jones
      • CA- a person can become a trespasser when they goes beyond permission given to him
        • this decision could mean that a guest at a dinner party in someone's house may become a trespasser if they enter another room
          • burglary is supposed to protect people's home and other buildings from trespasser who intended to steal
    • Conditional intent
      • conditional intent does not permit a conviction for the full offence in other situations e.g rbbery


No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Criminal law resources »