[quote=“Riptide”]
No, not really. And if you tell the cops that you were protecting your property when you beat the crap out of him, expect to get charged. While you can’t beat the shit outta the kid (although he deserves it), you can make a citizen’s arrest. This gives you more rights (in regards to apprehending a thief) than defending your property. If this case you can use reasonable force to apprehend him (reasonable to be determined by others). Just make sure you tell the kid (and the cops) that you were making a citizen’s arrest. Sounds stupid as it seems like a technicality. But welcome to Canadian law, and the fact we have no property rights. … [/quote]
Citing some legal authorities might help. An owner or occupant (eg a tenant) can use “as much force as is necessary” to prevent a person from forcibly breaking into or entering a dwelling house:
Criminal code of Canada
40. Every one who is in peaceable possession of a dwelling-house, and every one lawfully assisting him or acting under his authority, is justified in using as much force as is necessary to prevent any person from forcibly breaking into or forcibly entering the dwelling-house without lawful authority.
Age does not appear to make any difference, other than that less force should be needed when dealing with little people.
If the person is trespassing but not “forcibly entering”, you can use “no more force than is necessary”, which appears to be less than “as much force as is necessary”, to prevent the trespass or remove them:
- (1) Every one who is in peaceable possession of a dwelling-house or real property, and every one lawfully assisting him or acting under his authority, is justified in using force to prevent any person from trespassing on the dwelling-house or real property, or to remove a trespasser therefrom, if he uses no more force than is necessary.
An owner can make a citizen’s arrest as well, but only if the person is committing an offence, and the owner must “forthwith deliver” the person to a peace officer.
494(2) Any one who is
(a) the owner or a person in lawful possession of property, or
(b) a person authorized by the owner or by a person in lawful possession of property,
may arrest without warrant a person whom he finds committing a criminal offence on or in relation to that property.
Citizens arrest does not appear to give any power to use force, beyond those of a home owner or occupant.
Breaking and entering is obviously a criminal offence, but caution would be appear to be called for under circumstances where it is not clear why the person is on the property. I would doubt that a citizens arrest could be justified if the person was there because they were confused or for some reason thought they had been invited in. You can only arrest someone “committing a criminal offense”. That being said, the onus is on them to explain why they are there:
- (1) Every person who, without lawful excuse, the proof of which lies on that person, enters or is in a dwelling-house with intent to commit an indictable offence in it is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years or of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
My overall read of the situation, based on what has been said, is that a home owner or occupant would be within their rights holding a person, say in a head lock or bear hug, until the police arrive to take charge of them. Telling them that a citizens arrest is being made may not be a bad idea as well.