PO: Theft Flashcards
(20 cards)
Define S1 of Theft Act 1968
Dishonest appropriation of property belonging to another with the intention to permanently deprive the other of it.
Explain the appropriation act S3 Theft Act
Appropriation is assuming the rights of the owner =
For example; Taking, lending, consuming or selling some one else’s property (R v Pitham) or switching price labels (R v Morris)
Explain consent within Theft
Consent is irrelevant as to whether the owner consents or not (R v Lawrence). Honesty is not an issue with AR
Explain the case of R v Pitham and Hehl
Courts interpret the term of Appropriation broadly to cover any rights of the owner.
Explain the case of R v Morris
Appropriation occurs as soon as the rights of the owner have been assumed.
Explain the case of R v Gomez
Confirmed the approach in Morris, appropriation starts and finishes the moment the D touches the property and is a single, instant event.
Explain the case of Lawrence v Commissioner of the Met
Appropriation will take place irrelevant to consent
Explain S4 Theft Act: Property
- Money - any currency
- Real Property - land or buildings
- Personal Property - Belongings- hair or urine
- Things in action- a right which can be enforced against another person by taking legal action- against cheque
- Other tangible things - rights which have no physical presence - video game data
Explain S4 case Oxford v Moss
Confidential information cannot be stolen, here a photocopy of an exam was not regarded as property, therefore, no theft.
Explain what things are not considered as property
- confidential information
- wild flowers + Wild animals unless sold for financial gain
Explain S5 Belonging to another
The V must have had possession, control or proprietary interest in the property. This also includes property that is not the sole property of the V
Explain S5 case R v Turner
The garage held proprietary interest due to the repairs taking the car was theft even though it belonged to D
Explain S5(3)
Where the V has entrusted the property to another this must be used for the intended purpose under an obligation to use the property for that purpose.
Explain S5(4)
Where D gains property by mistake then they are under an obligation to return to its owner.
Explain the case Davidge v Bunnett
There was a clear obligation to use the money in a certain way any other use would be theft.
Explain the case AG Ref (No 1 of 1983)
Where D receives property by mistake they are under an obligation to return it. Refusal to do so will be theft.
Explain Dishonesty S2 theft act
To decide if the D is acting dishonestly the jury must consider applying the honesty exceptions
S2(1)(a)- D thinks they have a legal right to the property ( R v Robinson)
S2(1)(b)- D thought they had the owners consent to appropriate (R v Holden)
S2(1)(c)- D cannot find the owner through reasonable steps ( R v Small)
Explain the Dishonesty Ivey test
- Was what was done dishonest according to the ordinary standards of the reasonable and honest person?
- Did the D realise what he was doing was dishonest by the standards?
Explain S6 Intention to permanently deprive
There is intention to permanently deprive if you treat the property as your own to dispose of regardless of the others rights.
Under s6(2), there is intention to permanently deprive even if the property is returned but some of its value has been diminished (Lloyd)
Explain the case of R V Easom for S6
Theft was quashed as he had ‘conditional intent’ He would only have stolen if there was something he wanted. just attempted theft.
