A break-in is every homeowner's nightmare and when the worst happens, many are left wondering - what can I legally do to defend myself?
Recently Michelle Keegan and her TOWIE husband Mark Wright were the latest celebrities to have suffered a terrifying home raid by a masked gang at their £3.5million Essex mansion.
It is reported four suspects entered their sprawling property for around a minute but hurried away when Mark started yelling, as experts claim the pregnant actress, 37, and her husband were preyed on due to their Instagram page.
But the recent incident raises questions of what you would do if crooks descended on your home.
The government say individuals in England, Wales or Northern Ireland can use 'reasonable force' to protect themselves or others if a crime is taking place in their property.
This means that, in the 'heat of the moment,' you could pick up an object to defend yourself, or even physically tackle the intruder to stop them from escaping.
But there's a catch - while the law allows you to act in self-defence, it doesn't define exactly what constitutes 'reasonable force.'
To help unblur this grey area, MailOnline have spoken to Abdullah Al-Yunusi, a top barrister and partner from MPR Solicitors to help answer your burning questions.
Michelle Keegan and her TOWIE husband Mark Wright were the latest celebrities to have suffered a terrifying home raid by a masked gang
Experts claim the pregnant actress, 37, and her husband were preyed on due to their Instagram page documenting the renovation of their sprawling Essex mansion (pictured)
The Instagram account, Wrightyhome, documents the renovation the property went under as well as a look inside the lavish house as it looks now and boasts more than 663,000 followers and has been viewed millions of times
MailOnline spoke to Abdullah Al-Yunusi (above), a barrister and partner from MPR Solicitors to help clear up the grey area of what you can do if someone breaks into your home
Q. What can be defined as 'reasonable force'?
A. The law in the UK is very different to that on the other side of 'the pond'.
Starting point in the UK is that reasonable force in self-defence is determined by what is proportionate and necessary in the circumstances as you honestly believed them to be.
This allows individuals to defend themselves, others and their property using force but it must not be excessive.
To claim self-defence, the key question is whether any defendant genuinely believed they needed to use force, regardless of whether that belief was mistaken or unreasonable.
For example, imagine waking up in the middle of the night to see a shadowy figure sneaking through your living room.
In a panic, you grab a heavy lamp and knock them out, believing they are an armed intruder.
Later, you realise it was your forgetful neighbour who had wandered into the wrong house.
Even though your belief was wrong and, by most standards possibly unreasonable it doesn't matter, as long as it was genuinely held at the time.
However, if your mistaken belief was caused by being drunk on alcohol or high on drugs, that's a different story.
If you down a few beers and then attack a delivery driver thinking they're a burglar, the law won't accept your defence.
Q. What are the legal limits on using weapons when defending against a break-in?
A. Yes, you can use weapons where it is reasonable and not grossly disproportionate.
However, if the force used is clearly excessive, like using a gun to defend yourself after a slap, it can't be seen as reasonable.
For example, there have been high profile examples where a burglar was apparently shot in the back while they are fleeing and there was no longer any potential perceived danger - so clearly not self-defence.
In courts vigilante action, revenge, or retribution are not permitted as reason of defence.
According to the government, a person in England, Wales or Northern Ireland can use 'reasonable force' to protect themselves or others if a crime is taking place in their home (stock image)
Q. What is grossly disproportionate force?
A. If your action was 'over the top' or a calculated action of revenge or retribution for example, this might amount to grossly disproportionate force for which the law does not protect you.
i.e. If you had knocked an intruder unconscious and then went on to kick and punch them repeatedly such an action would be more likely to be considered grossly disproportionate.
Q. How does the law handle incidents where a crook may not be directly threatening you - the homeowner?
A. You are only permitted to rely on the householder defence if you are using force to defend yourself or others.
They cannot seek to rely on the defence if they were acting for another purpose, such as protecting their property, although the law on the use of reasonable force will continue to apply in these circumstances.
Q. What happens if the intruder dies?
A. If you have acted in reasonable self-defence, as described above, and the intruder dies you will still have acted lawfully.
Indeed, there are several such cases where the householder has not been prosecuted.
However, if, for example you knocked someone unconscious, then decided to further hurt or kill them to punish them; or you knew of an intended intruder and set a trap to hurt or to kill them rather than involve the police, you would be acting with very excessive and gratuitous force and could be prosecuted.
This means that, in the 'heat of the moment,' you could pick up an object to defend yourself, or even physically tackle the intruder to stop them from escaping (stock image)
Q. How does the law protect me?
A. The government have tried to tried to evolve the law following national publicity in certain cases by seeking to introduce legislation which on the face of it gives greater protections to householders who seek to protect themselves and or their property when faced with an intruder in their home.
New legislation was introduced in Crime and Courts Act 2013 which gives 'special protection' for house holders.
In householder cases under the new householder provisions in Section 43 of The Crime and Courts Act 2013, the use of force is now considered to be reasonable in the circumstances as the householder believed them to be if it was grossly disproportionate in those circumstances.
However, the provision does not give householders free rein to use disproportionate force in every case they are confronted by an intruder.
A householder will therefore be able to use force which is disproportionate but not grossly disproportionate.
The provision does not give householders free rein to use disproportionate force in every case they are confronted by an intruder.
