Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key


Play button


Play button




Click to flip

28 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Lloyd v DPP 1992
no physical intrusion
Samuels v Stubbs
jumped on d policeman's hat, denting it. "temporary functional derangement" of the hat
Hardman v Chief Constable Avon 1986
protestors - painted figures on a pavement in solubale whitewash - temporary but - damage covered "mischief done to property" - caused expanse and inconvenience to d Local Authority
A v R
spit on the policeman's uniform, could be wiped off with a wet cloth with very little effort - not crim dam
improved painting
Cox v Riley 1986
changed computer programme - Computer Misuse Act 1990
R v Denton 1982
employee was asked by d employer to set fire to machinery. Held - honest belief that employer consented. - lawful excuse ss2(a) s 5 Crim dam Act
Jaggard v Dickinson
drunk - broke d window of a friend's house - not guilty
Hunt 1977
deputy warden - concerned about fire alarm (working?)- to enforce - set fire to an empty room - called firebrigade, evacuated building, pressed button - did not work. Held - guilty - not capable of protecting other property
Hill 1988
nuclear strike - ghosh test
Johnson 1994
changed a locker - damaged door frame. Held: had moved any of his property in - crim damage
cut wire - human rights - but - gov-nt can derogate from its obligations in case of emergency
R v Jones 2004
protested, criminal damage + aggravated trespass
R v Jones 2006
R v G 2003 (overruled Caldwell)
shd b subjective test - children set fire on newspapers - spread to supermarket causing damage of 1000000 pounds. The mens rea of crim dam is satisfied by proof of intention or advertent recklessness
R v Steer 1987
fired a rifle - had to intend - glass fragments to endanger life. Danger was caused by d shot not by crim damage
Webster and Warwick (conjoined)
stone from d bridge - convicted but quashed - not enough to show/ damage to d train-danger to people's lives
Miller 1983
set fire/mattress/ went next door
petrol bomb into d house
Eley v Lytley 1885
Gayford v Chouler 1989
trampling down grass - CD
Barnet LBC v Eastern Elictricity Board 1973
Roe v Kingerlee 1986
mud on the wall - cost £7 to remove
R v Faik 2005
Blake v DPP 1993
D was a vicar who believed that the Gov-t should not use military force in Kuwait and Iraq in the Gulf War. He wrote a biblical quotation with a marker pen on a concrete wall post outside the Houses of Parliament. He was claiming tht he ws carryingout the instructions of God and this gave him a defence under s.5(2)(a), as God ws entitled to consent to the damage of property, and that the damage he did was in order to protect the property of civilians in Kuwait and Iraq and so he had a defence under s.5(2)(b). Convicted and appealed, both claims rejected.
Ayliffe and others 2005
R v Smith 1974
Elliot v C 1983
A 14year-old girl with learning difficulties, poured white spirit in a shed and lit it. Acquitted, the risk of destroying the shed wasn't obvious to her.