LAW

Published on
​KembaraXtra-Case Law-Hardman v Chief Constable for Avon and Somerset (1986) CC

I. Core Principle:
  • Criminal Damage: Even easily removable markings can constitute criminal damage if they cause expense and inconvenience to rectify.
II. Facts of the Case:
  • Defendants: Members of CND (Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament).
  • Action: Painted human silhouettes on a pavement.
  • Paint: Water-soluble, designed to wash away with rain.
  • Intervention: Local authority cleaned the pavement before rain could wash away the paint.
III. Legal Issue:
  • Did the defendants' actions constitute "criminal damage" despite the paint being water-soluble?
IV. Holding:
  • Yes. The court held that the actions constituted criminal damage.
V. Reasoning:
  • Expense & Inconvenience: The local authority incurred expense and inconvenience to clean the pavement, which was sufficient to establish criminal damage.
  • Irrelevance of Washability: The fact that the markings could be easily washed away was not determinative. What mattered was the actual expense and inconvenience caused before this could happen.
VI. Key Takeaways:
  • Definition of Damage: Damage is interpreted broadly to include temporary or easily reversible actions if they require intervention and incur costs.
  • Focus on Impact: The case emphasizes the impact of the act on the property owner/authority (cost, effort) rather than solely on the permanence of the alteration.
Picture
0 Comments