CRIMINAL DAMAGE

Barrister Zahra Zaman

BSc (London), LLB Hons (London), Bar-at-Law (Lincoln’s Inn)
Advocate Lahore High Court

TITLE HERE 00 MONTH 0000 11/15/2022 1

CRIMINAL DAMAGE ACT 1971: OFFENCES

• Basic Criminal Damage: • Making threats to

s 1(1) destroy or damage
• Aggravated Criminal property: s 2
Damage: s 1(2) • Possession with intent to
• Arson: s 1(1) & (3) destroy or damage
property: s 3
• Aggravated Arson: s
1(2) & (3)
BASIC CRIMINAL DAMAGE: S 1(1)

Actus Reus Mens Rea

• Destroy or damage • Intent or recklessness as
• Property to destroying or
damaging such property
• Belonging to
another Defences
• “Without lawful excuse”
 ACTUS REUS: DAMAGE

• Samuels v Stubbs
• No need to define these terms
• See e.g. A (A juvenile) v R
• Hardman v Chief Constable Avon & Somerset
• Roe v Kingerlee
• Morphitas v Salmon
• R v Fiak
DESTROY OR DAMAGE – CONCLUSIONS

• “Damage” is a matter of fact and degree:

Samuels v Stubbs
• Damage can be temporary.
Look for:
• (i) Expense or effort required to remedy
damage,
• (ii) Impairment of value,
• (iii) Impairment of usefulness.
 ACTUS REUS

• Property
• CDA 1971 S 10(1)
• R v Whitely
• Belonging to another
• CDA 1971 s 10(2)
 MENS REA

• Intent or recklessness as to destroying or

damaging such property
• Recklessness: see R v G
 RVG
A person acts recklessly within the meaning of s1 CDA
1971 with respect to –
(i) A circumstance when he is aware of a risk that it
exists or will exist
(ii) A result when he is aware of a risk that it will occur.
and
It is, in the circumstances known to him, unreasonable to
take that risk.
Chief Constable of Somerset and Avon v Shimmen

TITLE HERE 00 MONTH 0000 8

 MENS REA: SUMMARY
• D must know that the property belongs to another or
realise that it might; R v Smith
and
• He must intend to damage or destroy that property or
realise that his actions might result in such
damage/destruction;
and
• (Where the prosecution is relying on recklessness) in
the circumstances, the risk of damage to property must
be an unreasonable one to take.
 DEFENCES
• “Without lawful excuse”
• CDA 1971 s 5
• Belief that the “owner” consented or would
have consented had he known: s5(2)(a)
• Belief that damage was necessary to protect
other property, belonging to D or another: s
5(2)(b)
DEFENCES: CONSENT - S 5(2)(A)

• Who does D think owns the property, or

otherwise is in a position to give consent?
• Does D believe that this person consents, or
would have consented had he known what D
was doing?
• Subjective test: s5(3)
• Jaggard v Dickinson
CONSENT – S5(2)(A)
• Relevance of motive for D’s act?
• R v Denton
• Can God consent to damage?
• Blake v DPP
 DEFENCES: PROTECTION OF PROPERTY -
S5(2)(B)

1. D. acts in order to protect property. R v Baker and

Wilkins

2. s5(2)(b)(i) - D. believes that the property is in

immediate need of protection. Johnson v DPP

3. s5(2)(b)(ii) – D. believes that the means of protection

adopted are reasonable in the circumstances.

4. The act was objectively capable of protecting the

property. R v Hunt, R v Hill & Hall, Blake v DPP.
 OTHER LAWFUL EXCUSES

S 5(5)
e.g. Self defence, duress etc
AGGRAVATED CRIMINAL DAMAGE

s 1(2) Criminal Damage Act 1971

• Actus Reus
• Destroying or damaging
• Property
• Belonging to D or another
AGGRAVATED CRIMINAL DAMAGE

Mens Rea
Intention or recklessness as to destroying or
damaging property
and
Intention or recklessness as to thereby the
endangering life of another
Note: no life need actually be endangered (R v
Sangha)
AGGRAVATED CRIMINAL DAMAGE
• The danger to life intended or foreseen must
arise from the damage caused, not from the
cause of the damage
• R v Steer
• R v Dudley
• R v Webster
AGGRAVATED CRIMINAL DAMAGE

• Without Lawful Excuse

• S 5(2) defences do not apply to the s 1(2)
offence: see s 5(1)
 ARSON/AGGRAVATED ARSON

• CDA 1971 s 1(3)

• “An offence committed under this section by
destroying or damaging property by fire shall
be charged as arson”
S2 – THREATS TO DAMAGE PROPERTY

Actus Reus
Makes a threat to another person to (a)
destroy or damage property belonging to
that other or a third person
Or
(b) To destroy or damage his own property
in a way which he knows is likely to
endanger the life of that other or a third
person.

TITLE HERE 00 MONTH 0000 20

S2 – THREATS TO DAMAGE PROPERTY

Mens Rea
Intending that the other would fear that the
threat would be carried out.

TITLE HERE 00 MONTH 0000 21

S3 – POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO
DESTROY OR DAMAGE PROPERTY.
Actus Reus
A person has anything in his custody or control.

TITLE HERE 00 MONTH 0000 22

S3 – POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO
DESTROY OR DAMAGE PROPERTY.

Mens Rea
Intending to use it or cause or permit another to use it
(a) to destroy or damage any property belonging to
some other person or
(b) to destroy or damage his own or the user’s property
in a way which he knows is likely to endanger the life
of some other person.

TITLE HERE 00 MONTH 0000 23