The damage need not be permanent (in case, trampling down grass was sufficient)
1 of 6
A (a juvenile) v R (1978)
The damage must be more than merely trivial or nominal (in case, spit on coat-coat was not rendered imperfect or inoperable)
2 of 6
Roe v Kingerlee (1986)
what constitutes damage is a matter of fact and degree for the jury
3 of 6
Hardman (1986)
painting of human silhouettes on pavement amounted to damage as although it could be washed away, it caused expense and inconvenience to victim
4 of 6
Samuels v Stubbs (1972)
a policeman’s hat which has been stamped on (and could have been pushed back out) amounted to damage as it is not nec to render the property useless or prevent it from serving its normal function
5 of 6
Seray-Wurie (2012)
The def need not intend, nor foresee, that what he does will be regarded as damage (in case, def wrote messages on wall) (q’n of law)
6 of 6
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
The damage must be more than merely trivial or nominal (in case, spit on coat-coat was not rendered imperfect or inoperable)
Back
A (a juvenile) v R (1978)
Card 3
Front
what constitutes damage is a matter of fact and degree for the jury
Back
Card 4
Front
painting of human silhouettes on pavement amounted to damage as although it could be washed away, it caused expense and inconvenience to victim
Back
Card 5
Front
a policeman’s hat which has been stamped on (and could have been pushed back out) amounted to damage as it is not nec to render the property useless or prevent it from serving its normal function
Comments
No comments have yet been made