Criminal Law
Criminal Damage
S.1 (1) CDA 1971
Offences under the CDA 1971 are triable either way- subject to the following qualification-
Where the value of damage does not exceed £5000, the magistrates must proceed as if the
offence was summary only.
However, this does not mean that it is a summary offence, it remains a triable either way
offence for purposes other than trial.
If tried in the Crown Court then the maximum punishment is 10 years imprisonment (s4(2)).
Where the offence is committed by fire, the suspect will be charged with arson (s1 (1) and 1 (3))
which carries a maximum punishment of life imprisonment.
S 1 (1) of the CDA 1971 states:
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”.
Actus Reus Mens Rea Defence
Damage or Intention or recklessness as to destroying or Without lawful excuse
destruction Damaging property
Property Intention or recklessness as to the property belonging
to another.
Belonging to another
Damages or destroys is undefined in the statute.
Whether property had been damaged is a question of fact and degree to be determined either
by the jury or magistrate Cox v Riley (1986)
, The jury or magistrates should apply ‘their common sense’ in deciding ‘whether what occurred
was damage or not’ Roe v Kingerlee (1986) taking into consideration the circumstances of the
case, the nature of the property and how the property has been affected.
In deciding if properly has been damaged the jury/ magistrate will consider:
Nature of how the item is affected and interfered with.
Does it cause expense?
Does it cause inconvenience?
Property that is permanently damaged beyond repair is classed as property which is destroyed.
Damage- Actual Physical Harm
However, the damage must be more than trivial (De minimus rule)
A v R (1978)- Juvenile spat on a policeman’s raincoat and it left a faint mark that could be wiped
away with a wet cloth.
Damage- Property value and usefulness
If the value and/or usefulness of property is effected (whether permanently or temporary) then
property may be deemed as damaged.
There is no need for property to be rendered useless if the value is diminished e.g. water in
beer (Roper v Knott 1898).
Need to look at the nature of the property in deciding if its value has been impaired e.g.
Morphitis v Salmon (1990).
Property
S10 (1): “In this Act “property” means property of a tangible nature, whether real or personal,
including...” must be tangible.
Belonging to another
Cannot commit basic criminal damage against your own property.
S.10 (2): property belongs to another if somebody else has “custody and control,” a propriety
interest or charge on the property.
Arson
S1 (3)
Criminal Damage
Either-way
Criminal Damage
S.1 (1) CDA 1971
Offences under the CDA 1971 are triable either way- subject to the following qualification-
Where the value of damage does not exceed £5000, the magistrates must proceed as if the
offence was summary only.
However, this does not mean that it is a summary offence, it remains a triable either way
offence for purposes other than trial.
If tried in the Crown Court then the maximum punishment is 10 years imprisonment (s4(2)).
Where the offence is committed by fire, the suspect will be charged with arson (s1 (1) and 1 (3))
which carries a maximum punishment of life imprisonment.
S 1 (1) of the CDA 1971 states:
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”.
Actus Reus Mens Rea Defence
Damage or Intention or recklessness as to destroying or Without lawful excuse
destruction Damaging property
Property Intention or recklessness as to the property belonging
to another.
Belonging to another
Damages or destroys is undefined in the statute.
Whether property had been damaged is a question of fact and degree to be determined either
by the jury or magistrate Cox v Riley (1986)
, The jury or magistrates should apply ‘their common sense’ in deciding ‘whether what occurred
was damage or not’ Roe v Kingerlee (1986) taking into consideration the circumstances of the
case, the nature of the property and how the property has been affected.
In deciding if properly has been damaged the jury/ magistrate will consider:
Nature of how the item is affected and interfered with.
Does it cause expense?
Does it cause inconvenience?
Property that is permanently damaged beyond repair is classed as property which is destroyed.
Damage- Actual Physical Harm
However, the damage must be more than trivial (De minimus rule)
A v R (1978)- Juvenile spat on a policeman’s raincoat and it left a faint mark that could be wiped
away with a wet cloth.
Damage- Property value and usefulness
If the value and/or usefulness of property is effected (whether permanently or temporary) then
property may be deemed as damaged.
There is no need for property to be rendered useless if the value is diminished e.g. water in
beer (Roper v Knott 1898).
Need to look at the nature of the property in deciding if its value has been impaired e.g.
Morphitis v Salmon (1990).
Property
S10 (1): “In this Act “property” means property of a tangible nature, whether real or personal,
including...” must be tangible.
Belonging to another
Cannot commit basic criminal damage against your own property.
S.10 (2): property belongs to another if somebody else has “custody and control,” a propriety
interest or charge on the property.
Arson
S1 (3)
Criminal Damage
Either-way
