Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our expert legal writers, as a learning aid to help law students with their studies.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of LawTeacher.net. Any information contained in this case summary does not constitute legal advice and should be treated as educational content only.

Jaggard v Dickinson - 1981

341 words (1 pages) Case Summary

16th Jul 2019 Case Summary Reference this In-house law team

Jurisdiction / Tag(s): UK Law

Jaggard v Dickinson [1981] 1 QB 527

Criminal Damage – Intoxication – Mistake


The defendant had been told by a friend that they could stay at their house and “use it as their own”.  Returning to the street drunk one evening the defendant attempted to gain access to an identical house on the street after mistaking it for her friend’s property.  After being denied access by the actual owner, the defendant broke a window and gained access through this way.  After being arrested the defendant indicated that she mistakenly believed it was her friend’s house and that her friend would have consented to her gaining entry by breaking a window.  She was charged with Criminal Damage contrary to s1(1) Criminal Damage Act 1971 and convicted.  The defendant appealed.


Was the defendant entitled to rely on the defence of mistake?  Whether the defendant’s intoxicated mistake that the victim would have consented to her criminal damage was a defence.  Whether voluntary intoxication is excuse to criminal damage.


The appeal was successful.  The defendant was entitled to rely on mistake as a defence under s5(2)(a) Criminal Damage Act 1971 which provides that it is a lawful excuse for a person committing criminal damage that they believed the person who owned the property in question would have consented.  This was even so considering the defendant’s state of intoxication.  As such, this formed a special statutory exception to the general rule set down in DPP v Majewski [1976] UKHL 2 which provides that voluntary intoxication was no excuse for crimes of basic intent.  Whilst voluntary intoxication is not a defence to criminal damage, the statutory defence available under s5(2)(a) Criminal Damage Act applied regardless of the defendant’s state of voluntary intoxication.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

Related Content

Jurisdictions / Tags

Content relating to: "UK Law"

UK law covers the laws and legislation of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Essays, case summaries, problem questions and dissertations here are relevant to law students from the United Kingdom and Great Britain, as well as students wishing to learn more about the UK legal system from overseas.

Related Articles