Law 04 Revision - Criminal Damage

HideShow resource information
Where is the offence of criminal damage contained?
Criminal Damage Act 1971
1 of 24
What are all the types of criminal damage and their section numbers?
The basic offence – s(1), the aggravated offence – s(2), the basic arson offence – s(3) and aggravated arson – s(4)
2 of 24
What is the first element of criminal damage?
Destroys or damages
3 of 24
What was held in the case of A v R (1978)?
The defendant spitting upon the victim was not regarded as damage as it could be removed at no cost or effort.
4 of 24
What was held in the case of Roe v Kingerlee (1986)?
Whether property is damage is a matter of ‘fact or degree’, it needs not be permanent and is regarded as damage if it costs effort to remove.
5 of 24
What was held in the case of Morphitis v Salmon (1990)?
A scratch on a scaffolding pole did not amount to damage because the scratch did not impair its value or usefulness.
6 of 24
What is the second element of criminal damage?
Property
7 of 24
What does s10(1) of the Criminal Damage Act 1971 say?
Property means property of a tangible nature, whether real or personal and including money.
8 of 24
What is the third element of criminal damage?
Belonging to another
9 of 24
What does s10(2) of the Criminal Damage Act 1971 say?
Property shall be treated for the purposes of this Act as belonging to any person having custody or control of it, having in it any proprietary right or interest or having a charge on it.
10 of 24
What was held in the case of Smith (1974)?
Fixtures and wiring were regarded as belonging to another even though the defendant purchased them, the landlord held a proprietary interest in them as they were installed in his property.
11 of 24
What is the fourth element of criminal damage?
Intention or recklessness as to the destruction or damage
12 of 24
What was held in the case of Gemmel and Richards?
This case re-instated the subjective test for recklessness which was originally stated in the case of Cunningham.
13 of 24
What is the fifth element of criminal damage?
Without lawful excuse
14 of 24
What does s5(3) Criminal Damage Act 1971 say?
It is immaterial whether the belief is justified or not if it is honestly held.
15 of 24
What does s5(2)(a) of the Criminal Damage Act 1971 say?
A defendant will have lawful excuse if they believed that the victim had consented or would have consented if they had known of the circumstances.
16 of 24
What was held in the case of Jaggard v Dickinson?
The defendant was allowed to rely upon the lawful excuse even if their mistaken belief is attributable to intoxication. The court emphasises that the reasonableness of the belief is immaterial; as long as it is honestly held then it does not matter i
17 of 24
What does s5(2)(b) of the Criminal Damage Act 1971 say?
A defendant has lawful excuse if they destroyed or damaged property in the belief that they were acting to protect it, it was in immediate need of protection and the means of protection adopted were or would be reasonable in regard to all of the circ
18 of 24
What was held in the case of Hunt?
The defendant was unable to rely upon the lawful excuse outlined in s5(2)(b) as his actions were not to protect property and no property was in immediate need of protection.
19 of 24
What was held in the case of Cresswell and Currie?
The defendants were unable to rely upon any of the lawful excuses because they had been acting to protect wild badgers which were not regarded as property for the purpose of criminal damage.
20 of 24
What is the additional mens rea for the aggravated offences?
Intention or recklessness to endanger life by the destruction or damage of property
21 of 24
What was held in the case of Steer (1987)?
The defendant’s conviction for aggravated criminal damage was quashed because he had not intended to endanger life by the destruction or damage of property; he had intended to destroy or damage the property and to endanger life separately.
22 of 24
What was held in the case of Sangha (1988)?
It does not have to be proved that life was actually endangered for the aggravated offence, just that the intent to endanger life by the destruction of property was present.
23 of 24
What does s1(3) say about arson?
An offence committed under this section by destroying or damaging property by fire shall be charged under arson.
24 of 24

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

What are all the types of criminal damage and their section numbers?

Back

The basic offence – s(1), the aggravated offence – s(2), the basic arson offence – s(3) and aggravated arson – s(4)

Card 3

Front

What is the first element of criminal damage?

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

What was held in the case of A v R (1978)?

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

What was held in the case of Roe v Kingerlee (1986)?

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Criminal law resources »