9084 · 2.2.7
Criminal damage as defined in Criminal Damage Act 1971 flashcards
Revision flashcards for Cambridge 9084 Criminal damage as defined in Criminal Damage Act 1971 (syllabus 2.2.7). Flip, recall, then mark a real past-paper question.
Card
s1(1) basic criminal damage?
Without lawful excuse, destroys or damages property belonging to another, intending or being reckless as to damage.
Card
What is damage (Morphitis)?
Injury or impairment of usefulness or value — temporary damage can suffice. It is a matter of fact and degree.
Card
Recklessness (R v G)?
D aware of risk property would be damaged and unreasonably took that risk — subjective test.
Card
Lawful excuse s5(2)(a)?
D believed owner would consent if they knew circumstances and state of D's mind. The belief must be honest but not necessarily reasonable (*Jaggard v Dickinson*).
Card
Aggravated damage s1(2)?
Basic offence plus intention/recklessness as to endangering life by the damage — max life imprisonment.
Card
Arson s1(3)?
Destroying/damaging property by fire — a way of committing criminal damage, not a separate offence. Can be basic or aggravated.
Card
What are the actus reus elements of basic criminal damage under s.1(1) CDA 1971?
1. Destroying or damaging; 2. Property; 3. Belonging to another; 4. Without lawful excuse.
Card
What is the legal test for 'damage' in criminal damage cases?
It is a matter of fact and degree for the court. It does not need to be permanent but must typically involve some expense, time, or effort to remedy. Trivial harm that does not impair value or usefulness may not be sufficient (*Morphitis v Salmon*).
Card
What is the mens rea for basic criminal damage?
Intention to destroy or damage property belonging to another, OR recklessness as to whether such property is destroyed or damaged.
Card
What test for recklessness applies to criminal damage?
Subjective (Cunningham) recklessness, as confirmed in *R v G and another*. The defendant must have personally foreseen a risk of damage and unreasonably proceeded to take that risk. The objective *Caldwell* test is no longer law.
Card
What is the lawful excuse defence under s.5(2)(b) CDA 1971?
The defendant acted to protect property they subjectively believed was in immediate need of protection, using means that were objectively reasonable in the circumstances.
Card
What is the mens rea for aggravated criminal damage under s.1(2) CDA 1971?
1. Intention or recklessness as to damaging property. 2. Intention or recklessness that life would be endangered by the damage. The danger must stem from the damaged property itself (*R v Steer*).
Card
What is the significance of the £5,000 threshold in criminal damage cases?
Under s.22 Magistrates' Courts Act 1980, if the damage value is below £5,000 (and it's not arson), the offence is tried summarily in the Magistrates' Court, with a lower maximum sentence.
Card
What did *R v Hill and Hall* establish regarding the s.5(2)(b) defence?
The threat to the property being protected must be immediate for the defence to apply. In the case, the defendant's belief that a nuclear base would be attacked in the future was too remote.
Card
Can a person be guilty of criminally damaging their own property?
Yes. For aggravated criminal damage (s.1(2)), a person can be liable for damaging their own property if they intend or are reckless as to endangering the life of another by that damage. For basic damage (s.1(1)), the property must belong to another.