Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Criminal Law > Property Offences - Criminal damage & Fraud > Flashcards

Property Offences - Criminal damage & Fraud Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Civil Procedure 1L flashcards MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards
1
Q

S.2 Fraud Act 2006

A

Fraud by false representation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

False representation

A

D made a representation which was false - dishonesty

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

S.11 Fraud Act 2006

A

Dishonest obtaining of services

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

S.4 Fraud Act 2006

A

Fraud by abuse of position

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

S.3(1) Theft Act 1978

A

Making off without payment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

3 Criminal Damage offences

A

S.1(1) “Simple” CR
S.1(2) “Aggravated” CR
S.1(3) Arson

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

S.1(1) Criminal Damage Act 1971 defintion

A
  • Simple CR; A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another intending to destroy or damage any such property or being reckless as to whether any such property would be destroyed or damaged shall be guilty of an offence.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

AR/MR of S.1 CDA 1971

A

AR: Damages or destroys, property belonging to another
MR: Intentionally, or recklessly, without lawful excuse

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Destroys meaning

A

CPA guidance; make sure you can prove the destruction otherwise, damaging property is the more appropriate choice

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What is damage?

A

Gayford v Ghouler (1898)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Damage - matter of fact & degree

A
  • Roe v Kingerlee (1986)
  • Blake v DPP (1993)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Damage can be temporary or permanent

A

Hardman v CC of Avon & Somerset (1986)
A v R (1978)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Damage; “temporary impairment of value or usefulness”

A

Fiak (2005)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Impact on value or usefulness

A

Morphitis v Salmon (1990) - Auld J “damage…should be widely interpreted so as to conclude not only permanent or temporary physical harm, but also permanent or temporary impairment of value or usefulness”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Examples…

A

Tracey (1821)
Henderson & Batley (1984)
Fisher (1865)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Are animals property

A

Cresswell & Currie (2006)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

s.10 interpretation

A

Property shall be treated for the purposes of this Act as belonging to any person—
(a) having the custody or control of it;
(b) in it any proprietary right or interest (not being an equitable interest arising only from an agreement to transfer or grant an interest); or
(c) having a charge on it.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Can D criminally damage jointly owned property?

A

Yes

19
Q

Intention

A

R v Smith (1974) - D must intend to destroy or damage property belonging to another

20
Q

Recklessly (subjective test)

A

R v G (2004)

21
Q

s.5 Criminal Damage Act 1971

A

“without lawful excuse”

22
Q

s.5(2) - (3) what amounts to lawful excuse?

A

s.5(2)(a) belief in consent
s.5(2)(b) Property at risk and in need of immediate protection & what D did was reasonable in all the circumstances
s.5(3) Honest belief in lawful excuse

23
Q

S.5(3) Honest belief in lawful excuse

A

Blake v DPP (1993)

24
Q

S.2(2)(a)

A

Belief in consent of owner - Denton (1982) Jaggard v Dickinson (1980)

25
Q

S.5(2)(b) Subjective Test

A

Belief that other property in need of protection
Subjective test: did D believe that the property was in need of protection and that means used were reasonable?

26
Q

Objective Test

A

Could D’s acts be said to be preformed in order to protect the property (based on the facts as D believed them to be)?

27
Q

s.5(2)(b) Belief that the other property in need of protection

A

Mitchell (2004)
Greenpeace (2000)
Hunt (1978)

28
Q

s.5(2)(b) Belief that other property in need of protection not an act of anger/fustration

A

Kelleher (2003)

29
Q

Clear causal link required

A

Ashford & Smith (1988)

30
Q

What about banksy?

A

Do graffiti artists lack MR? or do they have a lawful excuse?

31
Q

Criminal Damage & Protestors

A

Just stop oil - Van Gogh painting
Attorney General’s Reference (No. 1 of 2022) (2022) – the “Colston Four”

32
Q

Article 9 of ECHR

A

Freedom of thought, conscience and religion

33
Q

Article 10

A

Freedom of expression

34
Q

Article 11 of ECHR

A

Freedom of assembly & association

35
Q

AG’s Reference (No.1 of 2022)

A

If ‘significant damage’ were caused during a protest, prosecution and conviction would be beyond the Convention’s protection because either the conduct was not peaceful or the prosecution and conviction would clearly be proportionate.

A judge could not direct a jury to convict, but a judge could withdraw an issue from the jury if no reasonable jury—properly directed—could convict

36
Q

Is there a good defence?

A

If significant damage was caused during a protest, prosecution and conviction would be beyond the conventions protection because either the conduct was no peaceful or the prosecution and conviction would be disproportionate

37
Q

Aggravated Criminal Damage s.1(2) CDA 1971

A

s.1(2)A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property, whether belonging to himself or another –
(a) Intending to destroy or damage any property or being reckless as to whether any property would be destroyed or damaged; and

38
Q

Aggravated Criminal Damage s.1(2) CDA 1971- Part B

A

b) Intending by the destruction or damage to endanger the life of another or being reckless as to whether the life of another would be thereby endangered; Shall be guilty of an offence.

39
Q

Aggravated Criminal Damage

A

Does not require the “belonging to another” aspect
MR: requires it to be without lawful excuse and reckless as to whether another’s life is endangered

40
Q

Danger to life

A

Steer (1988)
- link between damage to property and danger to life
- Cf. Webster (1995)
- Warwick (1995)

41
Q

Arson; s.1(3)

A

An offence committed under this section by destroying or damaging property by fire shall be charged as arson

42
Q

AR of Arson

A
  • Damages or destroys
  • Property
  • Belonging to another
  • By fire
43
Q

MR of Arson

A
  • Intentionally
  • or Recklessly
  • Without lawful excuse
44
Q

Arson case

A

Miller (1983)

Criminal Law (16 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions