ipl-logo

Criminal Damage Act 1971 Case Analysis

947 Words4 Pages

The question above calls for the detailed analysis of the Criminal Damage Act 1971, hereby as, CDA 1971, and how it is to be applied at situation which involve property damage and punishments for the required act. Further discussion would also include the situation where a threat is used to destroy property damage according to the CDA 1971. In order to apply the CDA 1971, we need to know, what criminal damage actually means. Criminal damage is any damage which has been caused by an individual to some form of property. When a case is concerned with damage to property which is criminal, the case is brought by the state against that individual in a criminal court and the most common examples of criminal damage would be arson. As in the question, …show more content…

It would be dealt by section 1(2)(a) as it states that anyone would be liable of property damage if he/she intends to destroy some ones property. Here Andy had a clear intention of throwing the cup of tea on her favorite painting to upset her as she was not taking Andy’s anger seriously . Morphitis v Salmon [1990] The authority of Roper v Knott [1898] laid down the rules for property damage stating that if the defendants act decreases the value of the property after his act, then he is liable for property damage. So according to the authority stated, Andy is liable for criminal damage as the wallpaper, he threw tea on, was destroyed. The second issue is, where Andy threatens Beth that he would burn each and every copy of her book in the warehouse and no one would see that book again would be dealt with section 2(a) of CDA 1971. As s.2(a) states that a person who threats another, intending that the other would fear it and damages a property belonging to that other or a third party, in my opinion, Andy would be held liable under the specified section because Andy wanted Beth to fear him but instead she laughed which complies with s.2(a) of CRA

Show More
Related

  • Target Court Case Summary

    666 Words  | 3 Pages

    Facts: Mrs. Moore entered into the Midwest City Target looking for a magnetic chess set and was informed that Target does not sell those. When Mrs. Moore was made aware of this information she started looking in the toy section. She picked up a telescope and the package was priced for around five or six dollars, so she purchased the telescope. Mr. Lanigan became aware of the situation and took the package from her car, led her inside, recited her rights, and accused her of switching price tags to make the item cheaper for her. One of Retail Shrinkage Control Employees also accused her of switching price tags.

    Read More

  • Dwight And Steve Hammond Case Study

    583 Words  | 3 Pages

    The father and son was oddly sentenced twice. Damaging or destroying

    Read More

  • The Case Of Ms. Borne Under 26 US C. 5845

    1084 Words  | 5 Pages

    The trial court convicted Ms. Borne under 26 U.S.C. 5845(f)(3) and sentenced her to 12-months in prison. The court of appeals affirmed, concluding that the conviction was proper based on the evidence presented at trial. According to the court of appeals, the prosecution proved—beyond a reasonable doubt—that Ms. Borne’s items: (1) could be readily assembled in a destructive device and (2) were designed, or intended for use as a destructive device. This was a reversible error. A.

    Read More

  • Memorandum: Aggravated Mayhem Charge Against Harvey Brewer

    692 Words  | 3 Pages

    “A jury may infer a defendant’s specific intent from the circumstances attending the act, the manner in which it is done, and the means used, among other factors.” Id. at 834. Moreover, the specific intent to maim may not be proven exclusively from evidence that the injury inflicted is permanently disfiguring. Id. In Ferrell, the defendant entered the victim’s apartment and, after a confrontation, shot one victim in the knee, and another victim in the neck paralyzing her.

    Read More

  • Essay On Roulette V City Of Seattle

    127 Words  | 1 Pages

    Sally was interfering with the access to the building when she was sitting and therefore she broke the law. Sally had the right to hand out the leaflets and be there as long as she was not obstructing the access to any buildings.

    Read More

  • Owed To Trespasser Case Study

    165 Words  | 1 Pages

    DISCUSSION I. Under the Ohio Duty of Care Owed to Trespasser Statute, even though Oleg Burov likely knew that children might trespass on his property, he will likely not be liable for a slip and fall injury Frank Gaad sustained outside a hot tub on Burov’s property. Using the doctrine of attractive nuisance the Ohio Duty of Care Owed to Trespasser Statute establishes the liability of real property owners for injuries sustained by minor trespassers. Mayle v. McDonald Steel Corp., No. 2010-T-0090, 2011 Ohio App. LEXIS 4319, at *18 (Ohio Ct. App. Oct. 7, 2011).

    Read More

  • Report On Daniel Lewis Allan Trial

    1257 Words  | 6 Pages

    During the trial Daniel Lewis Allan was charged with several criminal acts, such as possession of a stolen vehicle worth over $5,000, breaking and entering a dwelling house with intent to commit assault therein, kidnapping, unlawful confinement, aggravated assault and robbery, and possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose, or for committing an offence. The accused assaulted the complainant, Allan Sutton, on August 29th 2003, dragged him out of the house, had placed the victim’s body in the trunk of the stolen car, seriously injured him in order to obtain the PIN number of the complainant’s debit card, and dumped the body at the side of McMillan road. On the morning of the event, the victim was in the bathroom of his house in Surrey getting

    Read More

  • Mccloy V New South Lewis Case Study

    1379 Words  | 6 Pages

    I Introduction In McCloy v New South Wales, the High Court upheld the validity of provisions in the Electoral Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Act 1981 (NSW) that imposes caps on political donations, prohibits donations from property developers and restricts indirect campaign contributions in New South Wales. The majority did so on the grounds that whilst each of the provisions burdened the implied freedom of political communication, they had been enacted for legitimate purposes and hence, did not impermissibly infringe upon the implications within the Commonwealth Constitution.

    Read More

  • How Did Dave Violated The Law Under Section 352

    1452 Words  | 6 Pages

    Dave had violated the law under Section 352 of the Penal Code when he assaults May by banging on the door and shouting at the top of his voice threatening May to watch out once he got hold of May. When the lock gave way, May was afraid that Dave could harm her as Dave is an Australian six foot tall guy, therefore she jumped out of the window and broke her ankle. Under the section 352 of the penal code, it also says that unless the defendant actions are caused by grave and sudden provocation, he shall be punished with a fine or a jail term or both. In Dave’s case, there is no grave and sudden provocation in my opinion as he has the time to follow May upstairs. Similar to R v Roberts (1971), the court held that the defendant’s actions were foreseeable

    Read More

  • The1803 Court Case Analysis

    185 Words  | 1 Pages

    The ruling made by Chief Justice John Marshall in the1803 court case Marbury v. Madison was consider significance because it established the power of the judicial branch with the principle that the Supreme Court may declare an act of Congress void if it is considered inconsistent with the United States Constitution. This means that the court has the power to decide which laws are considered constitutional in what is referred to as judicial review. Judicial review in the courts, states that the judicial branch can review laws created by the legislative branch and establish if they are constitutional or not. The separation of power provided a type of check and balance to insure that no one branch in the government hold all the power and that

    Read More

  • What Is Del Mason Trial

    401 Words  | 2 Pages

    1. A court proceeding where a person who is charged with committing a crime against the state is brought to trial to be found either guilty or not guilty. Del Mason was brought into court on the suspicion that he had robbed a bank, which would be a crime against the state. 2. A civil case involves two or more parties in a legal dispute.

    Read More

  • Earl Faison Case

    476 Words  | 2 Pages

    If injury is caused or threats are made with a weapon of

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of King Hit Law

    1515 Words  | 7 Pages

    1. A powerful blow to the head, neck or chest that causes the victim to fall to the ground unconscious is called a ‘king hit’. The victim may die due to the force of the blow received, or due to the impact of their skull coming into contact with the ground. Since 2000, as many as ninety Australians have been killed as a result of king hit attacks.

    Read More

  • Penal Code 1405 Research Paper

    1964 Words  | 8 Pages

    Solving the Case A man was walking his dog at night when he heard a gunshot. He ran to the place where he heard it and saw a young man shot on the floor with a gun beside him. He picked it up carelessly and put it aside then called 911. When the police arrived they took all the evidence with them. A month later there are police at his doorstep arresting him for the murder of the young man.

    Read More

  • Case Analysis: You Will Be The Judge

    588 Words  | 3 Pages

    You Will Be The Judge Facts: The case involves a 12 year old child named Griffin Grimbly who told the teacher that he was beaten with a clothesline by his father Mr.Gimli. In court, the Mr.Gimli argued that he was devoted to Christian and was following the Biblical injunction on child rearing, “Spare the rod and spoil the child”, as well as arguing that s 43 of the criminal code gives parents the right to use “reasonable force” in disciplining their children. Issue: Is Mr. Grimbly is guilty of or not guilty of assault ? Held: Mr.Grimbly is guilty of assault.

    Read More

More about Criminal Damage Act 1971 Case Analysis

Open Document