Here is a sample plan for a response to this question: Introduction: - Put the quote in context - Lord Lawton is arguing that the Theft Act 1968 aimed to simplify the law on robbery by removing outdated technicalities - State that you will examine the accuracy of this view by looking at how the law on robbery has developed since 1968 Body Paragraph 1: - Explain the definition of robbery under s.8 of the Theft Act 1968 - Note some similarities retained from the old law e.g. use of force/fear still required - However, discuss how s.8 removed some technicalities e.g. no longer need to prove property was taken Body Paragraph 2:

1. Common Term 3
Trespasser
This element crosses both the AR
& the MR!
You visit Buckingham Palace and the Queen for
tea. She says that you are allowed to wander
about the dining room, but can’t go elsewhere.
You wander into the throne room and accidently
damage the throne.
You are attending a tea party in Buckingham
Palace’s garden, when Bob runs past you and
pushes you through the window. You grab, and
damage, the Queen’s portrait.
You are on Buckingham Palace’s tour when you
ask where the toilets are. On the way back, you
think you are taking a shortcut and go through
the Queen’s Bedroom, tearing the carpet en route.
Have you committed a burglary in any of
these situations?
Collins 1972
Smith, Jones 1976
“ the person entering does so knowingly that he
is a trespasser and nevertheless deliberately
enters or at the very least is reckless as to whether
or not he is entering the premises of another
without the other’s consent.”
What if you have permission to enter the
place? Can you still be a trespasser?
“when you invite a
person in your house to
use the staircase, you do
not invite them to slide
down the banisters.”
Barker v R…
Would they be
liable for theft?

2. Applying the Law:
Problem
Ann invites Bob, her new boyfriend, to her house. Ann’s dad tells
him he is not allowed near her bedroom. While watching TV, Bob
asks to go to the toilet. While upstairs he decides to go into Ann’s
bedroom and destroy all evidence of her previous boyfriend.
Has there been a burglary?

3. Mens Rea of Burglary
Knowledge or recklessness as to trespassing
With intent to
commit one of
the ulterior
offences
That for:
1. s.20 GBH
2. Theft
9 (1)(a) 9 (1)(b)
and
Conditional Intent is enough
Walkington ; AG’s Ref No1 & 2 of 1979

4. Two Championship footballers have been charged
with burglary in connection with the theft of items
from a Portsmouth nightclub. Southampton Football
Club striker Bradley Wright-Phillips, 23, and winger
Nathan Dyer, 20, will appear before Portsmouth
magistrates on 8 July. They were arrested in March
over claims that items were taken from Bar Bluu
nightclub, Southsea, on 28 February. Southampton
FC has declined to comment on the case. Bradley
Wright-Phillips, of Briton Street, Southampton, is the
son of former Arsenal and England player Ian Wright
and the half-brother of Chelsea and England player
Shaun Wright-Phillips. Nathan Dyer, also of Briton
Street, was a member of Southampton's youth team
before playing for the Championship club. Staff
members at the nightclub claim three mobile
phones, £145 in cash, student cards and cigarettes
went missing from three handbags. Police launched
an investigation when a group of men were filmed on
CCTV entering the unlocked staff room. The pair were
charged after answering police bail at Portsmouth
central police station.
Footballers charged with
burglary
Applying the Law:
9 (1)(a) or 9(1)(b)?
Entered?
All or part of a building?
Trespasser?
Showing your learning:
Applying the law (1/2)

5. Showing your learning:
Applying the law (2/2)
D breaks into a mobile library and sets the
books alight.
D uses a JCB to remove an ATM machine
[Richardson and Brown 1998]
D breaks into a garden shed to steal power
tools. The shed is 60 yards from the house
[Rodmell 2011]
D broke into a narrowboat and caused
criminal damage. He was arrested in the
icinty with a book from the boat. [Coleman
2013]
D robbed a house. There was a skip outside
and no evidence of anyone living there
whilst it was done up. [Flack 2013]

6. AO2:
Evaluation
Very wide definition, so it makes
it easier to convict. D does not
even be able to carry out the
offence (Ryan) – it simply needs
to be substantive.
...In the civil law, it means: “intentional,
reckless or negligent entry into a building
without consent of the occupier.” The
professors debate whether the criminal
should follow this. Currently the courts prefer
Griew, and say that trespassing is a criminal
term, and therefore does not include
negligent action.
The concept of the ulterior
offences is confusing to
the jury, and does not fit
with the common
understanding of ‘burglary’.
There is no clear definition of what is meant,
particularly the difference between a ‘dwelling’ and
‘non-dwelling’: vital to charging and sentencing
It is currently a very technical definition e.g. No wheels.
The mens rea in 9(1)(a) and
9(1)(b) are different, which
seems odd, given the number
of common terms...
... However they both require the intention and
recklessness to trespass as the common basis.
The differences reflect the two ways in which D
may commit burglary, although they seem to put
property over the person (GBH only!).
...However, the courts have been consistent in their
application of the common law definition, which might be
vague, but suits the current law.
There is a lot of debate over
this and quite what it means.
It is currently very wide, and
even applies when D might
have been given permission
(Jones, Smith)
...However, there
has been some
modernisation
recently e.g. The
removal of
attempted rape
under the Sexual
Offences Act 2003
...This may seem far
too wide, and unfair
given that D does not
even have to be able to
access the goods to be
liable given the max
penalty. There is no
need for the entry to be
effective .
Match the halves to start your AO2!

7. Quick guide to the synoptic…
This paper is focused on pulling your
knowledge of AS and A2 together to
evaluate, apply and explore one area of
the law.
You will have the synoptic booklet in
the exam.
The majority of the marks are
AO2
You must use the source booklet in
support of each of your arguments or
application.

8. It will be on the importance
or significance of one of
these eight cases...
 Dawson and James
 Hale
 Robinson
 Collins
 Brown
 Ryan
 Norfolk v Seeking and Gould
 Walkington
15
minutes
Examiner’s Tip:
Identify the critical point of the case and link it to two other points… how has the law developed
since? How did the case change the law?
Relating it at least one other significant case.
Question One
12 marks AO2 + 4 marks
AO1
What do you have to do?
Identify what the critical point of law from
the case is (using the source)
How far it confirms the prior law
How far it changes the law (with reference to
at least one other case).

9. Sample Question & Answer:
Discuss the contribution of the case of Dawson and James [Source 2] to the law on robbery

10. Now, let’s model it….
Explain the extent to which the case of HALE [Source 3] represents a
just development in the law on robbery. [16]
Section: Proposed Content
Importance of the
case:
Relationship to
prior cases
Relationship to
following cases:
Conclusion on
‘importance’
The approach:
Step One; Turn to the source the
case is in and see what
information can help
(the one before and
the one after can also
help!)
Step Two: Identify what the case
decided and why,
including the impact
on D
Step Three: Consider how later
cases have interpreted
this one
Step Four: Consider how the
decision here relates
to a previous case
Step Five: Conclude, using the
key words of the
question.

11. Now, try it for yourself…
The approach:
Step One; Turn to the source the
case is in and see what
information can help
(the one before and
the one after can also
help!)
Step Two: Identify what the case
decided and why,
including the impact
on D
Step Three: Consider how later
cases have interpreted
this one
Step Four: Consider how the
decision here relates
to a previous case
Step Five: Conclude, using the
key words of the
question.
Examine whether the decision of the court
in Brown created justice or injustice
Briefly explain the uimportance of Norfolk
v Seeking to the law on burglary.

12. If you’ve got it...
You should be able to mark it!
This is the official mark scheme.
Take care – general statements receive no marks.

13. Can you find the following
information?
One of the keys to this paper is knowing where you can find the information you need.
1. Where will you find the definition of burglary?
2. Where will you find the facts of Hale?
3. Where will you find reference to uncertainty
surrounding the term ‘building’
4. Which two sources discuss the meaning of force?
5. Where will you find reference to the old law on
robbery and burglary
Source 6, lines 1-11
Source 3, Line 1-7
Source 5 lines 23-24
Source 1; Source 2
Source 2, lines 8-12;
Source 5, lines 4-5

14. Examiner’s Tip:
You should be able to identify at least three points of application plus a case for each for high marks
There will be at least one critical point (this the bit of law which jumps out at you when you read the
question!) but you will need to also identify at least two other points.
Question Three
30 marks – 20 AO2, 10 AO1
What do you have to do?
This will consist of three short problem questions
to which you need to identify the relevant aspects
of law, and then apply it to the situation coming to
a sensible conclusion.
Remember that most of the relevant definitions
will be the sources ...

15. Answering Question 3

16. Now you apply it!
Carys invites David to have a drink in the motorhome in which she lives. While Carys is
getting the drinks, David looks through the open bedroom door and spots her diamond
watch lying on the bed. He goes in and takes the watch. [10]
Introduction: Links to
sources:
Linked case(s):
First Point:
Second Point
Third point
and
conclusion:

17. Got it? Now try it from scratch…
Introduction: Links to
sources:
Linked case(s):
First Point:
Second Point
Third point
and
conclusion:

20. Consolidating Source One
Show your understanding….

22. Lesson Challenge:
Do you know your sources?
1. Where will you find the facts of Collins?
2. Where do you find reference to academic’s views of the law on theft?
3. Where do you find an example of distinguishing?
4. Where will you find the problems of entry in burglary being discussed?
5. Where do you find reference to reform to the law on robbery?
6. Which source(s) mention the law prior to the theft act?
7. Where do you find reference to the fact that theft for robbery is different to that for theft?
8. Where will you find reference to the ‘common sense’ of the jury?
9. Where do you find reference to the issue of trespassing?
10. Where will you find reference to an aspect of burglary which no longer exists?

26. What’s the source?

27. Starter:
What’s the case?
It wasn’t all white
on the night.
Bagsy mine!
Noooooooo….
Your actions are
heart wrenching
You put your left
arm in… can’t take
your left arm out!
One slightly used
car only £500…it
might look familiar
Hands on. Hands
up!
That’s not a knife
way to collect your
debt.
If only he’d walked
into the right
place…
All of you should be able to decide whether they are robbery or
burglary cases
Most of you should be able to identify the case names or facts
Some of you should be able to explain their legal importance.

28. Sorting out Question One…
Can you mix’n’match the cases to create a whole set of
question one plans?

29. How does it compare to the old law?
 What similarities can you spot with the current law?
 What differences can you identify?
A Grade Development:
 Do you think the courts are right when they say the old law was too technical?

30. What’s the old problem?

31. A Sample Essay Title:
According to Lord Lawton “The object of the Act was to get rid of all the old technicalities of the law of
larceny and to put the law into simple language… This is what happened in section 8 which defines
robbery” [Source 2, lines 5-8]
How far is this a correct statement of the law on robbery? [34]

32. Examiner’s Tip:
Focus on balance and
reason in your answer,
and make sure to
identify the point of the
question in your
introduction
You also need to be
accurate and precise in
your use of the source
material.
Time:
35 minutes
(technically)
around 50
Question Two
34 marks (16 AO2 + 14 AO1 + 4 AO3)
It will be a question on ROBBERY or BURGLARY, and will
use a quotation from one of the sources as a start. You
should start your response by putting this quote into
context: what is the source arguing? Why are they arguing
it?
You will need to look at what the law under the act is, and
the difficulties that the judges have had in clarifying and
interpreting this law.
Really you are looking at whether the development of the
law has been reasoned and consistent, or subject to
change.
The quote will identify a theme to focus on, and you
should be referring back to this throughout.
You will need to use a range of quotes from the source,
and add your own knowledge to the 8 cases in the source
(in other words look to use about 15+ cases)