CILEx L3 Criminal Law Principles 4 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: What is the actus reus of burglary under s.9(1)(a) Theft Act 1968?
- Entering a building or part of a building as a trespasser with intent to steal, inflict GBH, or cause criminal damage (Correct answer)
- Breaking into a building with the intention of committing theft
- Entering premises unlawfully regardless of intention
- Being found on premises without permission at night
Correct answer: Entering a building or part of a building as a trespasser with intent to steal, inflict GBH, or cause criminal damage
S.9(1)(a) burglary is committed by entering a building (or part of a building) as a trespasser with the intention to steal, inflict GBH, or cause unlawful damage to the building or anything therein.
Question 2: What is 'fraud by false representation' under the Fraud Act 2006?
- Dishonestly making a false representation with intent to make a gain or cause a loss (Correct answer)
- Any lie told during a commercial transaction
- Obtaining property by deception
- Making any untrue statement to another person
Correct answer: Dishonestly making a false representation with intent to make a gain or cause a loss
S.2 Fraud Act 2006 creates the offence of fraud by false representation: (1) making a false representation, (2) dishonestly, (3) knowing it is or might be untrue, (4) with intent to make a gain for oneself/another or to cause a loss.
Question 3: What is the defence of 'necessity' in criminal law?
- The defendant committed the offence to avoid a greater evil, where the harm caused was proportionate to the harm avoided (Correct answer)
- Any urgent situation that required breaking the law
- A defence available whenever the defendant had no other choice
- The same as the defence of duress
Correct answer: The defendant committed the offence to avoid a greater evil, where the harm caused was proportionate to the harm avoided
Necessity (sometimes called 'choice of evils') may excuse criminal conduct where the defendant acted to avoid a greater and imminent harm that could not be avoided otherwise, and where the action taken was proportionate (Re A (Conjoined Twins) [2000]).
Question 4: What is 'joint enterprise' (secondary liability) in criminal law?
- Where two or more persons share a common purpose to commit a crime, each is liable for acts within the scope of that purpose (Correct answer)
- Any situation where two people commit a crime together
- Liability of a person who assists another to commit a crime only where they are present
- Shared liability for the planning of a crime only
Correct answer: Where two or more persons share a common purpose to commit a crime, each is liable for acts within the scope of that purpose
Under the law of joint enterprise (as restated after R v Jogee [2016]), where two or more persons share a common criminal purpose, each is liable for offences committed pursuant to that purpose. Jogee removed 'parasitic accessory liability' and restored the requirement for intention to assist or encourage.
Question 5: What is the standard of proof in criminal proceedings?
- Beyond reasonable doubt (the prosecution must prove guilt so that the jury is sure) (Correct answer)
- Balance of probabilities (more likely than not)
- Beyond all possible doubt
- The defendant must disprove guilt on a balance of probabilities
Correct answer: Beyond reasonable doubt (the prosecution must prove guilt so that the jury is sure)
In criminal cases, the prosecution must prove the defendant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt — meaning the jury or magistrates must be sure of guilt. The burden of proof rests on the prosecution (Woolmington v DPP [1935]).
Question 6: What is the 'golden thread' from Woolmington v DPP [1935]?
- The presumption of innocence — the prosecution bears the burden of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt (Correct answer)
- The principle that all defendants are treated equally
- The right to a fair trial
- The principle that judges must direct juries correctly
Correct answer: The presumption of innocence — the prosecution bears the burden of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt
In Woolmington v DPP [1935], Viscount Sankey described the presumption of innocence as the 'golden thread' of English criminal law — the prosecution always bears the burden of proving every element of the offence beyond reasonable doubt.
CILEx L3 Criminal Law Principles 4
What is the actus reus of burglary under s.9(1)(a) Theft Act 1968?