Cases/ Statute For Chapt 2CD

Question 1

S1(3) CDA 1971

Answer 1

To destroy/ damage by fire

Question 2

Samuels v Stubbs 1972

Answer 2

Meaning of damage

Case: “temporary derangement” of Policemans hat was damage. Guilty.

PoL: damage includes temporary impairment.

Question 3

Statutory meaning of destroy /damage

Important for exam!!!!

Answer 3

None given- use case law
Use Hardman v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset 1986 pavements damaged by water soluble paint.

• “damage doesn’t have to be irreparable and if it takes time and or money to restore this is an indication of damage

Question 4

Guidance on damage

2

Answer 4

1. Permanent change in quality/value
2. Need not be irreversible- must take time effort or money to restore

Hardman v chief Constable of Avon and Somerset 1986

Question 5

A (a juvenile) v R 1978

Answer 5

Meaning of damage

Case: spit on a Policemans raincoat not damage as easily wiped off

PoL: of no damage occurs then no liability for criminal damage can occur

Question 6

S5(2) CDA 1971

Answer 6

Lawful excuse

S5(2)(a) consent or belief in consent

S5(2)(b) belief in need of immediate protection and the means adopted were reasonable

Question 7

S10(2) CDA 1971

Answer 7

Relating to belonging to another

• custody/control
• any proprietary right/interest
• having a charge on it

Question 8

Blake v DPP 1993

Answer 8

Lawful excuse (consent) s5(2)(a) CDA 1971

Case: vicar wrote on pillar of HoC, believing that God gave him permission.guilty.

PoL: belief that God would have consented is not a defence.

Question 9

S1(1) CDA 1971

Answer 9

AR destroy or damage

AR property

AR belonging to another

MR intending/ being reckless as to damage/destruction of property belonging to another

Without lawful excuse

Question 10

Denton 1982

Answer 10

Lawful excuse (consent) s5(2)(a) CDA 1971

Case: d set fire to mill, believing V wanted him to do it to make insurance claim. Not guilty.

PoL: D had a defence if d believes that v had or would have consented.

Question 11

S1(2) CDA 1971

Answer 11

The aggravated offence

Intentionally or recklessly destroy or damage any property, whether belonging to D or another, intending by the destruction or damage to endanger the life of another or being reckless as to whether the life of another would be endangered
No need for life to actually be endangered
Wenton 2010- poss of danger to life must stem FROM the CD (ng)
Warwick 1995
Webster 1995

Question 12

Smith 1974

Answer 12

Criminal damage . no Mens Rea

Case: D removed wiring that he had installed and that he thought was his in law. Not guilty as no MR

PoL: no liability fora honestly made mistake
Didn’t have the MR for intentionally damage or destroy as P based liability on intention rather than recklessness

Question 13

Hill, Hall 1988

Answer 13

Lawful excuse(immediate protection): s5(2)(b) CDA 1971

Case: cut down RAF fences as believed this would lessen the have of a soviet missile strike. Hill admitted didn’t think an attavk was Imminent and so defence failed.

PoL: need for protection must be believed tone immediate.

Question 14

Hunt 1977

Answer 14

S5(2))b) statutory defence

Case: D set fire to bedding in an old peoples home to draw attention to a defective fire alarm.

PoL: defence of “in order to protect property” did not apply.

Question 15

Morphitis and Salmon 1990

Answer 15

Case: scratching a scaffolding pole isn’t damage, but removal of a scaffold bar would impair use and therefore be damage

PoL: the CD must impair usefulness or value