Court case[1996] QB 567

Newbery, a 76-year-old man, had an allotment with a brick shed in which he kept valuable items. After repeated break-ins and vandalism, he took to sleeping in the shed with a loaded shotgun. At about 2 a.m. Revill, aged 21, and a companion came to break into the shed. Newbery, who could not see them, poked the shotgun through a small hole in the door and fired, hitting Revill in the arm and chest. Revill was prosecuted and pleaded guilty to offences committed that night; Newbery was tried for wounding and acquitted. Revill then sued Newbery for damages.

The Court of Appeal dismissed Newbery's appeal against the judge's decision in Revill's favour. An occupier owes a trespasser, even one bent on crime, a duty not to injure him by using unreasonable force; firing a shotgun blind through a door at a height likely to hit someone was more than reasonable force and was negligent. The defence of ex turpi causa did not apply: it would be wrong to hold that a burglar is an outlaw to whom no duty is owed, and the duty owed to trespassers under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1984 by analogy shows that the law protects even criminal trespassers from unreasonable harm. Revill's damages were, however, reduced by two-thirds for his contributory negligence.