The defence of property is a possible justification used by defendants who argue that they should not be held liable for the loss and injury they have caused because they were acting to protect their property. Courts have generally ruled that the use of force may be acceptable, but that lethal force is generally not acceptable in defending property, although it may be acceptable in self-defense or, in some countries, the defence of one's home.
| Property | Value |
|---|
| dbpprop:abstract
|
- The defence of property is a possible justification used by defendants who argue that they should not be held liable for the loss and injury they have caused because they were acting to protect their property. Courts have generally ruled that the use of force may be acceptable, but that lethal force is generally not acceptable in defending property, although it may be acceptable in self-defense or, in some countries, the defence of one's home. As deadly force is not allowed, the setting of booby-traps and the use of dangerous guard dogs is also either not allowed or only allowed on strict terms such as the prominent display of warning notices.
|
| dbpprop:reference
| |
| rdfs:comment
|
- The defence of property is a possible justification used by defendants who argue that they should not be held liable for the loss and injury they have caused because they were acting to protect their property. Courts have generally ruled that the use of force may be acceptable, but that lethal force is generally not acceptable in defending property, although it may be acceptable in self-defense or, in some countries, the defence of one's home.
|
| rdfs:label
| |
| skos:subject
| |
| foaf:page
| |
| is dbpprop:redirect
of | |
![[RDF Data]](/statics/sw-cube.png)
