Lawful excuse meaning

Highway authorities have a statutory obligation to act to prevent, so far as practicable, the stopping up or obstruction of highways within their areas. This Practice Note sets out guidance on obstructions under the Highways Act 1980 (HiA 1980) arising from placing building works, scaffolding or skips on the highway. For broader coverage of highway obstruction, see Practice Note: Obstruction of highways. For details of the tools available to local authorities to address highway obstructions, see Practice Notes: Local authority powers to manage highway obstructions—criminal offences and Local authority powers to manage highway obstructions—civil remedies. Licences for building works, scaffolding and skips Positioning scaffolding, hoardings or skips on the highway (including pavements) constitutes an obstruction and may amount to a nuisance. Under HiA 1980, s 137(1), a person who, without lawful authority or excuse, wilfully obstructs free passage along a highway commits an offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 51 weeks or a fine, or both. See Practice Note: Obstruction of highways. That...

Damage to property caused by fire is charged as arson A person who, without lawful excuse, destroys or harms another’s property by fire, intending that outcome or being reckless as to whether it occurs, commits arson under section 1(3) of the Criminal Damage Act 1971 (CDA 1971). For guidance on criminal damage generally, see Practice Note: Criminal damage. In R v Booth, the omission of any reference to arson in the particulars led the court to treat the indictment as a nullity. The point was considered again in R v Drayton, where the court held that the allegation must, at the very least, be identified as ‘damage by fire’, ensuring the defendant is in no doubt that fire damage is alleged, an accusation carrying a harsher sentence than straightforward criminal damage. This is because arson attracts sterner penalties than simple criminal damage, by clear comparison. Simple arson, where no risk to life is alleged, is an either-way offence. Where the damage relied upon amounts to ‘significant damage by fire’,...

This Practice Note examines the offence of making threats to kill. It outlines what the Crown must establish and unpacks the constituent parts of the crime in turn and in context. It also summarises the sentencing framework and cites leading, relevant authorities on sentence for this offence, with appropriate references. The offence of threats to kill The offence of threats to kill may generally be prosecuted either in the magistrates' court or in the Crown Court. Magistrates are particularly likely to refuse jurisdiction where there are multiple threats or the presence of a visible weapon, in such circumstances. Elements of the offence of threats to kill The elements are set out in section 16 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 (OATPA 1861). The prosecution must prove: any person, acting without lawful excuse, makes to another a threat to kill that person or a different person, intending that the recipient should fear the threat will be carried out. ...