Robbery Offences Explained

Being the victim of a robbery can be a stressful experience, resulting in the loss of possessions as well as causing significant emotional distress and future fears. The law aims to penalise those that commit robbery offences through legislation that aims to ensure that robbers can be punished for a wide variety of offences.

The following guide explains robbery offences; including the laws that penalise robbers, how a robber can be found guilty and what constitutes robbery in the eyes of the law.

Legislation Relating to Robbery

The main piece of UK legislation that relates to robbery is found in Section 8 of the Theft Act 1968. The law classes robbery as being a type of aggravated theft as robbery is recognised as having an element of a threat of force on others as well as the act of stealing.

When does the law recognise that an offence of robbery has been committed?

A person will be considered to be guilty of robbery as per the legislation in Section 8 of the Theft Act 1968 if they have stolen, and immediately before the theft or during the theft, they use force on another person or intend to make another person fear that there is a threat of force.

For a person to be found guilty of the offence of robbery, the following elements must be established in relation to their act:

• They must have stolen
• They must have used threat or force immediately prior to stealing or during the act of the theft.

What if force wasn't used before or during the theft but was used to escape following the robbery?

The law considers the act of theft to have been completed as soon as the appropriation of items has taken place. This means that once the offender has taken possession of the items, the offence of theft will be complete and therefore, using force to escape would not fall under the legal requirements for the use of force prior to or during the act of the theft.

However, based on previous legal cases, the court is likely to recognise that any use of force in order for the robber to escape the scene of the theft will still be recognised as force and inciting fear during the act and so the offence of robbery may still stand.

Does the law set out the need for a minimum level of force to be used?

The law does not make specific reference to a need for a minimum level of force to have occurred in order for a person to be found guilty of robbery. However, in a court case, it will be the job of the jury to determine whether there was force used by the defendant.

The law does not define what is meant by ‘force', and this means that a jury will be responsible for determining whether force has occurred. The force does not even need to be against another person, and many jurors will consider force to have been used if it was used against property or possessions.

Will the prosecution need to prove that the accused had an intention of stealing for a robbery offence to be established?

The law states that it must be established that the accused had an intention of theft to prove an offence of robbery. This means that a court must be satisfied that the defendant acted with dishonesty and had the intention of permanently depriving an owner of the possessions that they steal.

What is the maximum penalty for an offence of robbery?

The law treats a robbery offence very seriously, and the maximum prison sentence that can be imposed on a person found guilty of this crime is life imprisonment.