R v Walkington
Entering a part of a building from which one is excluded, such as behind a shop counter, can be burglary.
Facts
Mr Walkington was in a department store near closing time. He went behind a counter, which was a moveable counter area marked off from the rest of the shop, and opened the till, which was empty. He was convicted of burglary on the basis that he had entered part of a building as a trespasser with intent to steal.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction. Section 9 of the Theft Act 1968 covers entry into part of a building as a trespasser, and the area behind the counter was part of the building from which customers were impliedly excluded. It did not matter that the till was empty, because a conditional intention to steal whatever might be found is enough. Mr Walkington had entered the counter area with intent to steal if there was anything worth stealing.
Related cases on theft, robbery, burglary and fraud
- Attorney General's Reference (No 1 of 1983) [1985] QB 182
- Corcoran v Anderton (1980) 71 Cr App R 104
- Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd [2017] UKSC 67, [2018] AC 391
- Lawrence v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1972] AC 626
- Oxford v Moss (1979) 68 Cr App R 183
- R v Barton and Booth [2020] EWCA Crim 575, [2021] QB 685
- R v Collins [1973] QB 100
- R v Ghosh [1982] QB 1053
Studying criminal law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
