Criminal Law – Lecture 10
Property offences 2: Burglary and criminal damage
Burglary- Section 9 (1) (a) and Section 9 (1) (b) Theft Act 1968
Theft Act 1968, Section 9:
(1) A person is guilty of burglary if-
(a) he enters a building or part of a building as a trespasser and with intent to
commit any such offence as is mentioned in subsection (2) below; or
(b) having entered any building or part of a building as a trespasser he steals or
attempts to steal anything in the building or that part of it or inflicts or attempts to
inflict on any person therein any grievous bodily harm.
(2) The offences referred to in subsection (1)(a) above are offences of stealing anything in
the building or part of a building in question, of inflicting on any person therein any grievous bodily
harm…therein, and of doing unlawful damage to the building or anything therein.
There’s two different kinds of burglary:
(1) Section 9 (1) (a) : entering a building or part of a building as a trespasser with an intent
commit one of the following in the building:
a) Theft
b) Criminal damage
c) Grievous bodily harm
(2) Section 9 (1)(b): Having entered a building or part of a building as a trespasser, committing
either:
a) Theft or attempted Theft
b) Grievous Bodily harm or Attempted grievous bodily harm
Burglary AR = D must ‘enter’ a ‘building or part of a building’, as a ‘trespasser’
Controversy over the ‘Entry’ requirement as it is not defined anywhere in the Theft Act 1968, it is
left for the courts to determine its meaning. –
Collins 1973 – The court of appeal held that an entry must be ‘effective and substantial’.
However…
In Brown 1985 – The court of appeal held that, in fact, an entry only needed to be ‘effective’, not
‘substantial’
On the other hand …
Ryan 1996 – it was held that an entry neither needs to be ‘effective’ nor ‘substantial’. Therefor in
theory, inserting just one body part into a building would be enough to constitute an ‘entry’.
In Wheelhouse 1994 and Hardcastle 2006 – Inserting an object to ‘enter’ a property may also
count as an ‘entry’, so long as this insertion was made with the intention of committing a further
offence.
No clear definition on ‘building’ – left to courts to interpret
Property offences 2: Burglary and criminal damage
Burglary- Section 9 (1) (a) and Section 9 (1) (b) Theft Act 1968
Theft Act 1968, Section 9:
(1) A person is guilty of burglary if-
(a) he enters a building or part of a building as a trespasser and with intent to
commit any such offence as is mentioned in subsection (2) below; or
(b) having entered any building or part of a building as a trespasser he steals or
attempts to steal anything in the building or that part of it or inflicts or attempts to
inflict on any person therein any grievous bodily harm.
(2) The offences referred to in subsection (1)(a) above are offences of stealing anything in
the building or part of a building in question, of inflicting on any person therein any grievous bodily
harm…therein, and of doing unlawful damage to the building or anything therein.
There’s two different kinds of burglary:
(1) Section 9 (1) (a) : entering a building or part of a building as a trespasser with an intent
commit one of the following in the building:
a) Theft
b) Criminal damage
c) Grievous bodily harm
(2) Section 9 (1)(b): Having entered a building or part of a building as a trespasser, committing
either:
a) Theft or attempted Theft
b) Grievous Bodily harm or Attempted grievous bodily harm
Burglary AR = D must ‘enter’ a ‘building or part of a building’, as a ‘trespasser’
Controversy over the ‘Entry’ requirement as it is not defined anywhere in the Theft Act 1968, it is
left for the courts to determine its meaning. –
Collins 1973 – The court of appeal held that an entry must be ‘effective and substantial’.
However…
In Brown 1985 – The court of appeal held that, in fact, an entry only needed to be ‘effective’, not
‘substantial’
On the other hand …
Ryan 1996 – it was held that an entry neither needs to be ‘effective’ nor ‘substantial’. Therefor in
theory, inserting just one body part into a building would be enough to constitute an ‘entry’.
In Wheelhouse 1994 and Hardcastle 2006 – Inserting an object to ‘enter’ a property may also
count as an ‘entry’, so long as this insertion was made with the intention of committing a further
offence.
No clear definition on ‘building’ – left to courts to interpret
