9084 · 2.2.7
Criminal damage as defined in Criminal Damage Act 1971 — FAQ
Frequently asked questions for 9084 Criminal damage as defined in Criminal Damage Act 1971. Direct answers first, then deeper explanation — then practise with marking.
Can you be guilty of criminal damage for deleting someone's computer files?
No. Under s.10(1) of the CDA 1971, 'property' is defined as tangible property. Computer data and files are intangible. While this action is unlawful, it would be prosecuted under the Computer Misuse Act 1990, not the Criminal Damage Act 1971.
If I damage something by accident, am I guilty of criminal damage?
Not necessarily. The offence requires a mens rea of either intention or recklessness. If you genuinely did not intend to cause damage and did not foresee any risk of causing damage (the subjective test from R v G), you lack the required mental element. A pure accident, where the risk was not foreseen, would not lead to liability for this offence.
I thought I had permission to paint a mural on a wall, but I was mistaken. Do I have a defence?
Yes, you may have a lawful excuse under s.5(2)(a) of the CDA 1971. This provides a defence if you honestly believed that the owner had consented or would have consented. The key is your subjective belief. As established in Jaggard v Dickinson, this belief does not need to be reasonable, as long as it was genuinely held by you at the time.
What is the difference between basic criminal damage and aggravated criminal damage?
The key difference is the mens rea regarding endangering life. For basic criminal damage, the defendant only needs to intend or be reckless as to damaging property. For aggravated criminal damage (s.1(2)), the defendant must also intend or be reckless as to endangering life by means of the damage. Consequently, the maximum sentence is much higher (life imprisonment vs 10 years).