Understanding Robbery and Burglary

Think of robbery as theft with violence - it's when someone steals something whilst using force or threatening to use it. This makes it much more serious than ordinary theft, which is why the maximum sentence is life imprisonment.

Under Section 8 of the Theft Act 1968, robbery happens when someone steals and uses force "immediately before or at the time of doing so, and in order to do so." The key thing here is that all the normal elements of theft must be present first.

Quick Check: If there's no completed theft, there can't be robbery - even if force was used!

The case of R v Waters (2015) shows this perfectly. A defendant snatched someone's phone but said he'd give it back if her friend spoke to him. Since he didn't intend to keep it permanently, there was no theft - so no robbery either.

What Counts as Force in Robbery

You don't need to throw punches for it to count as force - even a simple push can be enough. The courts take a pretty broad view of what constitutes "force or threat of force".

In Dawson and James (1976), one defendant just pushed the victim who lost his balance, whilst the other took his wallet. The Court of Appeal said "force" is an ordinary word and it's up to the jury to decide if force was actually used.

However, there must be some direct contact. In P v DPP (2012), someone snatched a cigarette from another person's hand without touching them - this wasn't robbery because there was no direct force on the person.

Remember: The force must be used "in order to steal" - not just at the same time as stealing.

The timing is flexible though. In R v Hale (1979), defendants forced their way into a house, stole a jewellery box, then tied up the victim before leaving. The court said the theft was ongoing, so the tying up still counted as force "in order to steal."

Burglary - Two Different Types

Burglary is completely different from robbery because it's about unlawfully entering buildings, not using force against people. There are actually two types under the Theft Act 1968.

Section 9(1)$a$ covers entering a building as a trespasser with intent to steal, cause grievous bodily harm, or do unlawful damage. You don't actually have to commit these crimes - just intend to. Section 9(1)$b$ is when someone enters as a trespasser and then actually steals or inflicts GBH.

The famous case of R v Collins (1973) established that entry must be "effective and substantial." This drunk defendant climbed through a window to have sex with someone who thought he was her boyfriend - but his conviction was overturned because she'd actually invited him in.

Key Point: You can't be guilty of burglary if you had permission to enter, unless you go beyond that permission.

However, R v Brown (1985) showed you don't need your whole body inside - leaning through a broken window whilst rummaging through goods was enough for burglary.

Buildings, Trespass and Intent

The law defines buildings quite broadly - houses, offices, shops, and even some vehicles count if they're lived in. Section 9(3) specifically mentions caravans, and B&S v Leathley (1979) decided a freezer container was a building after sitting on a farm for over two years.

You can even burglarise part of a building. In R v Walkington (1979), someone went behind a shop counter and opened the till. Even though he was allowed in the shop, he wasn't allowed behind the counter, making him a trespasser in that part.

The prosecution must prove you knew you were trespassing. This includes situations where you had permission but went beyond it, like in R v Jones (1976) where a son took TVs from his father's house without permission.

Mental Element: For s9(1)$a$, you need intent to commit theft, GBH or criminal damage when entering. For s9(1)$b$, you need the mental element for whatever crime you actually commit inside.

The key difference between the two types is timing - s9(1)$a$ is about what you planned to do, whilst s9(1)$b$ is about what you actually did once inside.