Statute/ Cases For Chapt 4 Theft

Question 1

S2 TA 1968

3 beliefs that aren’t dishonest

Answer 1

3 statutory beliefs that aren’t dishonest

1. Belief that d would have consent of v
2. Belief in right of law to deprive v of property ( Robinson 1977)
3. Belief that the person to whom the property can’t be found by taking reasonable steps( rostron and collinson 2003)

Question 2

Lloyd 1985

Answer 2

Theft/ intent to perm deprive doesn’t include borrowing

Case: D borrowed films from cinema and lent them to friends to copy, then return them. Not guilty

PoL: borrowing only amounts to “intention to permanently deprive” if the intent of borrower was to return property in such a state that it had lost all its practical value.

Question 3

Kelly 1998

Theft under which section in this case?

Are dead bodies normally property and therefore capable of being stolen?

Answer 3

Definition of property: usually dead bodies not property

Case: D stole body parts. He was entitled to draw them but instead made casts of them and buried them in a field. Guilty

PoL:
Parts of corpses could be property if they were being used to teach students or for exhibits under s5(1) TA 1968

Question 4

S6 TA 1968

Intent to permanently deprive

Answer 4

Re intention to perm deprive s6 TA 1968

Defined as: “ treat the things as his own to dispose of regardless of the others rights AND..”

“…borrowing or lending may amount to intent to permanently deprive if it is for a period of time and in circs making it equivalent to an outright taking or disposal”
Velumyl 👍 Lloyd 👎

Question 5

Robinson 1977

Answer 5

Re s2 TA 1968: beliefs that aren’t dishonest

Case: D had kept a 5 pound note that had fallen from vs pocket during the struggle with V. Vs wife owed defendant 7 pounds and so defendant said he was taking the 5 pound in part payment.

PoL:
No theft under s2(1)(a) if d had a honest belief that he was entitled to the money.

Question 6

S4 TA 1968

Answer 6

S4 TA 1968: property

“includes money and all other property, real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property”

Question 7

S 5 TA 1968

And s5(3) TA 1968

Answer 7

S5 belonging to another

S5(1) talks about: “property shall be regarded as belonging to any person having possession or control of it or having in it any proprietary right or interest”

S5(3) relates to property which D gets subject to an obligation (Dubar 1995- money for charity raised must be used for its expressed purpose, otherwise it is theft)

Question 8

2 part dishonesty test for theft

Answer 8

First:
S2 TA 1968
3 beliefs about dishonesty
- right in law
- belief in consent
- belief P cannot be found

Then Ghosh test (2 questions)
1. Was Ds conduct dishonest by objective standards?

2. Did D realise this?

Question 9

Marshall and others 1998

Answer 9

Theft/intent to permanently deprive

Case: Ds obtained London Underground tickets that they then sold on to other potential customers. Guilty.

PoL:
Property can include both real tickets and the contractual right to travel.

Question 10

Ghosh test

Answer 10

Caselaw test for dishonesty

2 questions:

1. Was the defendants conduct this dishonest by objective standards?
2. If yes did the defendant realise this?

Question 11

S3 TA 1968

Answer 11

S3 TA 1968 (appropriation)

“any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner, including any later assumptions of a right by keeping it or dealing with it as owner”

Question 12

Gomez 1993

Answer 12

Theft- appropriation (when consent is irrelevant.

Case: D supplied goods in return for two checks that he knew was stolen. He gained authorisation from shop manager (who didn’t know checks were stolen) guilty

PoL: there was an appropriation even though he acted with authority of shop manager

Question 13

S1 TA 1968

Answer 13

Definition of theft

1. D is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriate property belonging to another with the intention to permanently deprive…
2. It is immaterial whether appropriation is made with a view to gain or for thief’s own benefit

Question 14

Intent to permanently deprive Theft: basic points

Answer 14

• not necessary to show deprivation. Intent is all that is required
• an intent to steal anything worth stealing will be insufficient if nothing worth stealing is found

-

Question 15

Velumyl 1989

Answer 15

Theft/ intent to perm deprive: same objects must be returned

Case: appellant took money from his company safe. Claims he intended to return it after the weekend. Guilty.

PoL: unless he intended to pay back exact notes and coins he had intended to permanently deprive the company.

Question 16

Woodman 1974

Answer 16

Theft/belonging to another/ possession or control

Case: D scrap metal from the site. Occupiers were unaware the metal was there. D claimed the scrap metal didn’t belong to another.

PoL:
A person has possession even if he is not aware or has forgotten. By having control of the site he has control of the property within (S5 (1) 1).