Proceeding contribution from Nick Palmer (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
To be fair, the Bill does attempt to clarify the meaning of"““building or part of a building””" by referring to section 9 of the Theft Act 1968, under which any inhabited vehicle or vessel is covered. Case law has established that a large freezer standing in a farmyard counts as a building. Does the proposed law not bring us into the realm of the ridiculous, where a struggle will vary in its terms depending on whether one has stumbled into a yard or a freezer, got into a car or whatever?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 440 c544
- 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 12:07:05 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_283159
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_283159
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_283159