Criminal Code of Canada - section 72(1) - Definition of forcible entry

section 72(1)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

Section 72(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada makes it a crime for someone to enter someone elses property in a way that threatens to cause a breach of the peace.

SECTION WORDING

72. (1) A person commits forcible entry when that person enters real property that is in the actual and peaceable possession of another in a manner that is likely to cause a breach of the peace or reasonable apprehension of a breach of the peace.

EXPLANATION

Section 72(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada pertains to forcible entry, which is a criminal offense. This section states that a person is guilty of forcible entry if they enter a real property that is currently under the actual and peaceful possession of another person. However, this offense does not apply to individuals who have legal authority to enter the property such as police officers executing a warrant or a landlord for the purpose of performing their duties. For an individual to be convicted of forcible entry, certain elements must be present. Firstly, the individual must have entered the property without the permission or consent of the owner or occupant. If the owner has given permission or the individual has an existing right to enter the property, they cannot be charged with forcible entry. Secondly, this entry must have been made in a manner that would likely cause a breach of peace or a reasonable apprehension of such a breach. For instance, if a person forcibly breaks open a door or uses threats to gain entry into a property, it is likely to cause a breach of peace. Therefore, such actions would fall under the purview of this section. The offense of forcible entry is a serious crime and is punishable under the Criminal Code of Canada. If an individual is found guilty, they may face fines or imprisonment for up to two years. Additionally, it may also lead to a civil lawsuit filed by the owner or occupant of the property, seeking damages for the breach of their peaceful possession.

COMMENTARY

Section 72(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with the offence of forcible entry. Forcible entry occurs when a person enters onto real property that is already in the possession of another person in a manner that is likely to cause a breach of peace or a reasonable apprehension of breach of peace. This offence is taken seriously in Canada, and the penalties for committing forcible entry can be severe. The purpose of this section is to prevent disputes between landowners and to ensure that the right to possess property is protected. The key element of this section is the presence of two factors - actual and peaceable possession of the property by another person and the entry of another person onto that property in a manner that is likely to cause a breach of peace or a reasonable apprehension of a breach of the peace. Actual possession refers to physical control of the property. Peaceable possession, on the other hand, refers to the right to exclude others from the property. In essence, this means that if a person is in actual possession of the property but has the right to exclude others from it, their possession is still deemed to be peaceable possession for the purposes of this section. Forcible entry can be committed in a myriad of ways. For instance, entering a property without permission or breaking into the property can be considered a forcible entry. Similarly, the use of threats or violence to gain entry into the property of another person can also be classified as a forcible entry. The consequences of violating section 72(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada can be severe. Forcible entry is a criminal offence that carries a penalty of up to two years in prison, a fine, or both. The courts have the discretion to impose the maximum penalty or a lesser sentence depending on the circumstances of each case. A breach of peace occurs when there is a disturbance of public order caused by a disturbance on private property. This can involve physical violence, or threats of violence, and may lead to the involvement of law enforcement agencies to restore calm. The commission of this offence can cause immense distress to the victim and the wider community. Reasonable apprehension of a breach of peace refers to a situation where there is a perception that a breach of peace is imminent if the person is allowed to enter onto the property. This means that the person trying to gain entry does not necessarily have to resort to violence or use force; their actions may be perceived as threatening enough to cause a reasonable apprehension of a breach of the peace. In conclusion, section 72(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that aims to protect the right of possession of real property and prevent disputes between landowners. It serves as a deterrent against individuals engaging in conduct that may have negative consequences for the victim and the wider community. The serious nature of the offence is demonstrated by the penalties that convicted individuals may face. The recognition of actual and peaceable possession of the property by another person and entering onto the property in a manner likely to cause a breach of peace or a reasonable apprehension of a breach is a key ingredient in enforcing this section of the Criminal Code.

STRATEGY

When dealing with section 72(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada, there are a number of strategic considerations to keep in mind. These include understanding the elements of the offense, exploring possible defenses, and determining whether or not it is appropriate to pursue criminal charges in a given scenario. One important strategic consideration is understanding the elements of the offense of forcible entry. To be convicted of this offense, the accused must have entered real property that was in the actual and peaceable possession of another in a manner that was likely to cause a breach of the peace or reasonable apprehension of a breach of the peace. This means that the accused must have knowingly entered property that did not belong to them and that was already being occupied by someone else. Additionally, their entry must have been likely to cause some kind of disturbance or conflict. Another key strategic consideration is exploring possible defenses to the charge of forcible entry. There are a number of legal arguments that may be used to defend against this offense. For example, if the accused had a legitimate reason for entering the property (such as if they were responding to an emergency or if they were a landlord entering their own rental property), this may be a valid defense. Similarly, if the accused believed they had a right to enter the property (for example, if they were the rightful owner of the property and the person currently occupying it was a trespasser), this may also be a defense. Once the potential defenses have been explored, another strategic consideration is determining whether it is appropriate to pursue criminal charges in a given scenario. In some cases, it may be more appropriate to pursue civil action (such as an eviction or a restraining order) rather than criminal charges. This may be particularly true if the dispute is primarily one of property ownership or if there is not a significant risk of actual violence or disturbance. In terms of strategies that could be employed when dealing with section 72(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada, there are a few key options. One strategy may be to try to de-escalate the situation as much as possible in order to minimize the risk of violence or conflict. This could involve talking to the other party, trying to negotiate a peaceful resolution to the dispute, or involving a third party mediator. Another strategy may be to gather as much evidence as possible to support your case. This could include taking photos or videos of the property and the alleged offense, compiling witness statements, and gathering any other pertinent information that could help prove your case in court. Finally, it may be helpful to seek legal advice from an experienced criminal defense lawyer who can provide guidance on the best course of action based on the specific circumstances of your case. This could involve formulating a specific legal defense or helping you to weigh the pros and cons of pursuing criminal charges versus civil action. By taking a strategic and thoughtful approach, it may be possible to successfully navigate a situation involving section 72(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada. Overall, the strategies that can be employed when dealing with this section of the Criminal Code of Canada will depend on the specific situation at hand, including the nature of the dispute, the evidence available, and the possible defenses that may be available to the accused.