Proceeding contribution from Lord Khan of Tooting (Labour) in the House of Commons on Friday, 2 December 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Criminal Law (Amendment) (Protection of Property) Bill.
Criminal Law (Amendment) (Protection of Property) Bill
I am glad that my hon. Friend mentioned the common law defence. He will be aware that ““Archbold”” also suggests that section 3 would not cover all cases of defence of the person, noting that if a person was attacked by someone who was insane, so as not to be responsible in law for his acts, the common law defence would apply and kick in. Is not one of the problems with the Bill, introduced by Her Majesty’s official Opposition, that there would be a difference between the statutory defence and the common law defence? If the Bill was passed, there would be a differential law that was less generous to an insane person than statutory law.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 440 c532-3
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Crime prevention Crimes against the person Crimes of violence Criminal law Buildings Burglary Criminal liability Firearms Protection Police Prosecutions Property Victims Trespass Self-defence
- Legislation
- Criminal Law (Amendment) (Protection of Property) Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 12:06:31 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_283104
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_283104
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_283104