5) Theft Flashcards
(97 cards)
Definition of Theft s1(1) Theft Act 1968
A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it….
Actus Reus of Theft
- Appropriation (s3 Theft Act)
- Property (s4 Theft Act)
- Belonging to another (s5 Theft Act)
Mens Rea
- Dishonestly (s2 Theft Act)
- With the intention to permanently deprive (s6 Theft Act)
Coincidence in Theft means that….
All of the elements must exist simultaneously.
When does the need for coincidence cause factual problems. ..
- eg chooses to keep it later
- uses gift for reason other than.
eg form dishonest intent after the event.
Can still amount to theft
Actus Reus - Appropriation
Defined as:
“Any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner amounts to an appropriation…”
Theft Act 1968 s 3(1)
R v Morris - FACTS
Appropriation
Change prices at self service act.
Removed and lowered pricing labels.
Arrested and convicted of theft
R v Morris - HELD
Appropriatiom
Only necessary to assume one of the rights of the owner - eg the owner’s right to label his goods.
Assumption of any one of the rights of an owner amounts to appropriation
Examples of assumption of any one of the rights of an owner amounts to appropriation
Selling, hiring, giving it away or destroying it.
Can a defendant appropriate property even with consent of the owner?
Yes
R v Gomez
R v Gomez - FACTS
Appropriation with consent
Assistant manager at an electrical store, allowed purchase of goods with stolen cheques.
Sale went ahead.
Convicted of theft
R v Gomez - HELD
Appropriation with consent
CoA found that if consent has been obtained by false representation
Can be appropriation without adverse interference with owners’ rights.
Lord Browne Wilkinson in R v Gomez
The word appropriation = objective description of the act done irrespective of the mental state of owner or accused.
Theft of gifts case
R v Hinks
R v Hinks
Theft of gifts
Man of limited intelligence was persuaded to give away £60k. Found guilty.
HoL held
1) Appropriation is a neutral act and state of mind of donor is irrelevant
2) Appropriation can take place with or without consent
3) Person can be found guilty of stealing a valid gift
Inter vivos meaning
Gift made between living people.
Later appropriation
Theft Act s 3(1)
Any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner amounts to an appropriation and this includes where he has come by property without stealing it, any later assumption of a right to it by keeping or dealing with it as owner
When does theft take place with later appropriation?
Theft takes place when the defendant forms the mens rea, subject to the remaining elements also being present.
The innocent purchaser
Innocent Purchaser exempted from liability for theft where the defendant purchases goods in good faith and later discovers that the seller had no title to keep the proeprty, but decides to keep it.
Theft Act 1968, s3(2)
Mala Fides
Bad faith the protection afforded by the Theft Act 1968 s 3(2)
R v Adams
Innocent purchaser
Purchased goods not knowing they were stolen.
Conviction of innocent purchaser quashed, under defence of Theft Act 1968, s3(2)
Actus Reus - Property
Property includes money and all other property, real or personal including, including things in action and other intangible property
What are the exceptions to things that can be stolen:
- In relation to land (s4(2))
- Things growing in the wild (s4(3))
- Wild creatures (s4(4))
Can land be stolen….
A person cannot steal land, or things forming part of land and severed from it by him or his directions.
Section 4(2)