| 单词 | Forcible entry |
| 释义 | 強行進入／強行闖入 Using force to enter premises or land. Criminal law - Gaining access to premises or land by force. If any police officer has reason to believe that any person to be arrested has entered into or is in any place, the person residing in or in charge of such place shall on demand of that police officer allow him free entry to the place and afford all reasonable facilities for search therein: Police Force Ordinance (Cap 232) s 50(3). The police office acting under a warrant (or where a warrant may issue but cannot be obtained without affording the person to be arrested an opportunity of escape) can enter such place and search it. If the police office cannot obtain admittance after notification of his authority and purpose and demand of admittance duly made, he can break open any outer or inner door or window of the place in order to effect an entrance: s 50(4). Comparable powers are also enjoyed by the police and other public officers under other ordinances, for example, Immigration Ordinance (Cap 115) s 56; Customs and Excise Service Ordinance (Cap 342) ss 17B, 17BA; Dangerous Drugs Ordinance (Cap 134) s 52; Dutiable Commodities Ordinance (Cap 109) s 14; Import and Export Ordinance (Cap 60) s 23. See also Breaking and entering; Trespass to land. Real property - Entry onto premises, with the intent to assume possession and by a means calculated to use force, as opposed to peaceful possession. In Hong Kong, entry onto premises (wrongdoers let into premises by accomplice inside) would not be forcible if it was not effected by violent or forcible means directed either at the premises or to any person: Janway Industrial Co Ltd v Asian Eagle Insurance Co Ltd [1985] 2 HKC 433 (HC). Conversely, in England, actual violence need not be proven: Dino Services Ltd v Prudential Assurance Co Ltd [1989] 1 All ER 422 (CA). The calculation to use force could be an intention to deter resistance rather than use force in an offensive or aggressive manner: Milner v Maclean (1825) 2 C & P 17. It does not extend to the use of force to retain possession once it has been gained: Hemmings v Stoke Poges Golf Club Ltd [1920] 1 KB 720; but see: Edwick v Hawkes (1881) 18 Ch D 199. The entry can be to any part of the premises and need not be entry from the exterior of the premises: Re Calf and the Sun Insurance [1920] 2 KB 366; Chung Nam Medicine Co Ltd t/a Chung Po Medicinal Co v Tai Ping Insurance Co Ltd [1987] 1 HKLR 397 (HC) (entry into a shop through an inter-connected supermarket). There must be an intention to enter (rather than to merely destroy the premises) (Jones v Foley [1891] 1 QB 730 (DC)), and to assume possession (rather than search and remove chattels). See also Entry. Tort - Entry onto a person’s premises without permission. A person entitled to the immediate possession of land may enter and, in a civil action, may justify the use of so much force as is necessary to effect entry and to expel an intruder, provided the force used is reasonable: Tullay v Reed (1823) 1 C & P 6; Hemmings v Stoke Poges Golf Club Ltd [1920] 1 KB 720. 使用暴力進入處所或土地。 刑法 - 使用暴力獲得進入處所或土地。如任何警務人員有理由相信任何須予逮捕的人已進入或置身在某處，則居住在該處或管理該處的人在該警務人員提出要求時，須容許該警務人員自由進入該處，並給予一切合理的便利，以便他在內搜查：《警隊條例》（第232章）第50(3)條。任何警務人員在根據手令行事的情況下（或在本可發出手令但為免使須予逮捕的人有機會逃離警務人員而未取得該手令的情況下），可進入該處及在內搜查。該警務人員如在妥為宣告其所具權能、目的及內進的要求後，仍無其他方法獲准內進時，則他為得以進入該處而可擊破任何地方的外部或內部的門或窗：第50(4)條。警隊及其他公職人員根據其他條例亦可享有類似的權力，例如《入境條例》（第115章）第56條；《香港海關條例》（第342章）第17B及17BA條；《危險藥物條例》（第134章）第52條；《應課稅品條例》（第109章）第14條；《進出口條例》（第60章）第23條。另見 Breaking and entering; Trespass to land。 土地財產 - 意圖行使管有權而以刻意導致武力的方法進入處所（而非和平的管有）。在香港，凡犯罪者在處所內的從犯的協助下進入該處所，但並無對該處所或任何人士使用暴力或強行的方法，則該等進入並非強行進入：Janway Industrial Co Ltd v Asian Eagle Insurance Co Ltd [1985] 2 HKC 433 （高等法院）。相反在英國，無需證明實際暴力：Dino Services Ltd v Prudential Assurance Co Ltd [1989] 1 All ER 422 （芵國上訴法院）。刻意使用武力可以是意圖阻嚇反抗，而非以使人反感或具侵略性的方式行使武力：Milner v Maclean (1825) 2 C & P 17。並不引申而適用於一旦取得管有而使用武力保留管有權的情況：Hemmings v Stoke Poges Golf Club Ltd [1920] 1 KB 720；但見Edwick v Hawkes (1881) 18 Ch D 199。進入可指進入處所的任何部分，無需是從處所外部進入：Re Calf and the Sun Insurance [1920] 2 KB 366；Chung Nam Medicine Co Ltd t/a Chung Po Medicinal Co v Tai Ping Insurance Co Ltd [1987] 1 HKLR 397 （高等法院）（透過互相連接的超級市場進入商店）。必需有進入的意圖（而非只意圖摧毀處所）（Jones v Foley [1891] 1 QB 730（英國地方法院），及取得管有的意圖（而非僅有搜查及移走實產的意圖）。另見 Entry。 侵權法 - 在未經許可的情況下，進入某人的處所。任何人享有即時接管土地的權利的人可進入有關土地，以及在民事訴訟中，可提出充分理由證明所使用的武力是為獲准進入及逐出闖入者所需，但所使用的武力需是合理的武力：Tullay v Reed (1823) 1 C & P 6; Hemmings v Stoke Poges Golf Club Ltd [1920] 1 KB 720。 |
| 随便看 |
|
法律词典收录了8080条英汉双解法律词条，基本涵盖了常用法律英语单词及短语词组的翻译及用法，是法律学习的有利工具。