CHAPTER XIV
GENERAL DEFENCES AND MITIGATING FACTORS
Division C: Defences and Mitigating Factors Relating to Unlawfulness
PART XIV
DEFENCE OF PROPERTY
256 Interpretation in Part XIV of Chapter XIV
In this Part
“property” includes property of any description and any interest or right therein;
“unlawful attack” means any unlawful conduct which endangers or infringes a person’s property.
257 Requirements for defence of property to be complete defence
(1) Subject to this Part, the fact that a person accused of a crime was defending his or her or another person’s property against an unlawful attack when he or she did or omitted to do anything which is an essential element of the crime shall be a complete defence to the charge if
(a) when he or she did or omitted to do the thing, the unlawful attack had commenced or was imminent; and
(b) his or her conduct was necessary to avert the unlawful attack; and
(c) the means he or she used to avert the unlawful attack were reasonable in all the circumstances; and
(d) any harm or injury caused by his or her conduct
(i) was caused to the attacker and not to any innocent third party; and
(ii) was not grossly disproportionate to that liable to be caused by the unlawful attack.
(2) In determining whether or not the requirements specified in subsection (1) have been satisfied in any case, a court shall take due account of the circumstances in which the accused found himself or herself, including any knowledge or capability he or she may have had and any stress or fear that may have been operating on his or her mind.
(3) In determining whether or not any means used by a person to avert an unlawful attack were reasonable, or whether or not any harm or injury caused to an attacker was proportionate to that liable to be caused by an unlawful attack, a court shall have regard to the nature of the property which the person was trying to protect and its value to him or her.
258 Killing in defence of property
A person accused of a crime involving the killing of another person shall not be entitled to rely upon a defence in terms of this Part unless
(a) the accused resorted to killing after taking all other possible steps to protect the property concerned; and
(b) the property concerned could not have been defended by any means except by killing; and
(c) the property concerned was of vital importance to the accused; and
(d) the accused believed on reasonable grounds that he or she would not receive adequate compensation for any destruction, damage or injury caused to the property concerned by the unlawful attack.
259 When defence of property partial defence to murder
If a person accused of murder was defending his or her or another person’s property against an unlawful attack when he or she did or omitted to do anything that is an essential element of the crime, he or she shall be guilty of culpable homicide if all the requirements specified in sections two hundred and fifty-seven and two hundred andfifty-eight are satisfied in the case except that the means he or she used to avert the unlawful attack were not reasonable in all the circumstances.
PART XV
ENTRAPMENT
260 Entrapment no defence to crimes
It shall not be a defence to a crime that the accused was trapped into committing the crime concerned, that is to say that the police or other authority or person, by using any inducement or encouragement, caused the accused to commit it for the purpose of obtaining evidence of its commission, but a court may, where it considers that unfair or undesirable entrapment methods were used by the police or other authority or person, take the manner of such entrapment into account as a factor in mitigation of sentence.
PART XVI
IMPOSSIBILITY
261 Requirements for impossibility to be complete defence
(1) Where a person is accused of a crime of which an essential element consists of a failure, omission or refusal to do anything, the fact that it was physically impossible for the accused to do that thing shall be a complete defence to the charge if
(a) the impossibility was absolute, that is to say, if it was objectively impossible for anyone in the accused’s position to have done that thing; and
(b) the impossibility was not due to the accused’s own fault.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), the fact that it is extremely difficult for a person to do a thing shall not constitute impossibility.
(3) This section shall not prevent a court, when imposing sentence upon a convicted person, from taking due account of any difficulty experienced by him or her in complying with a law.
Other defences - national proceedings
EDIT.