R v Walkington [1979] 1 WLR 1169 (CA)

Facts

  • The defendant entered a department store during business hours.
  • He went behind a counter marked for employees only, an area physically separated from customer access.
  • The defendant opened a cash register, found it empty, and was arrested.
  • He was charged with unlawful entry with intent to take items from the restricted area.

Issues

  1. Whether moving behind the counter, marked for employees only, constituted entry into a "part of a building" under the relevant law.
  2. Whether intent to steal could be established when the cash register was found to be empty.

Decision

  • The Court of Appeal held that the area behind the counter, physically and clearly restricted, qualified as a separate part of the building for purposes of unlawful entry.
  • Entering this area without authorization amounted to trespass.
  • The court ruled intent to steal is assessed at the time of entry; the fact that nothing was actually taken or available to be taken did not negate the defendant's criminal intent.
  • Walkington’s entry into the restricted zone, combined with his purpose to take items, satisfied the mental and physical elements of the offence.

Legal Principles

  • A clearly separated and marked area within a public building can amount to a "part of a building" protected by trespass-related criminal statutes.
  • Physical barriers and explicit limitations on entry (such as counters or signage for employees only) support treatment of areas as distinct and protected.
  • The intention to commit theft is determined at the point of unauthorized entry, not by whether theft was ultimately achieved or possible.
  • Trespass to take items is distinct from burglary under Section 9 of the Theft Act 1968, the latter requiring additional or aggravated elements and carrying a heavier penalty.

Conclusion

R v Walkington [1979] clarified that restricted areas within public buildings are legally protected under trespass law, and that intent to steal is judged at the moment of entry, not by subsequent events. The case remains influential in delineating protected spaces and how criminal intent is evaluated for offences involving unauthorized entry.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal