header-logo header-logo

Criminal damage: when the intuitive becomes counter-intuitive

11 November 2022 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 8002 / Categories: Features , Criminal , Human rights , Public
printer mail-detail
100251
The Court of Appeal has weighed in on the debate surrounding criminal damage & right to protest: Nicholas Dobson examines the verdict
  • The European Convention on Human Rights does not provide protection to those who cause criminal damage during protests which are violent or not peaceful, nor when the damage is inflicted violently or not peacefully.
  • Prosecution and conviction for causing significant damage to property, even if inflicted in a way which is ‘peaceful’, could not be disproportionate in Convention terms.

When I were a lad, boiling water burned you, ice was freezing cold, and criminal damage was clearly a crime. This was simply intuitive: in other words, readily, naturally and universally perceived. For as the influential 16th century theologian Richard Hooker wrote: ‘The mind of man desireth evermore to know the truth according to the most infallible certainty which the nature of things can yield. The greatest assurance generally with all men is that which we have by plain aspect and intuitive beholding.’ But, as

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll