THEFT Flashcards
(28 cards)
how does Section 1 of the theft act 1968 define theft
dishonest appropriation of property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it
what is the actus reus of theft
dishonest appropriation of property belonging to another
what is appropriation and the case
can be outright taking or treating property as your own ie selling property (Pithlam v Hehl)
what does s3(1) state about appropriation and the case
assumption of the rights of owner can take place when the property is innocently acquires, if d takes the keeps/deals with it —> other examples are label swapping (morris) and v cosenting through deception (Lawrence,Gomez)
Appropriation and gifts and the case
can take place when there is a gift made with consent and without deception, if it’d obtained through coercion
HINKS
appropriation and leaving property behind and the case
appropriation can take place if d leaves the property behind
CORCORAN V ANDERTON
S3(2) of the property act 1968
states d would be innocent if they purchase stolen goods in good faith
S4(1) of the theft act 1968 and the case
property can be tangible such as money or intangible such as things in action for example licences & patents (AG of Hong Kong v Chan Nai-Keung)
what are the 4 things that d not constitute to property and the sections and cases
1.) anything picked form the wild for reward or sale under S4(3)
2.) wild creatures unless kept in captivity, confidential information (Oxford v Moss) under S.4(4)
3.) electricity as in Low v Blease
4.) bodies/ body parts used for exhibitions/teaching purposes as in Kelly and Lindsay however body fluids can be stolen as in Welsh
S5(1) of the theft act 1968 and the case
property belonging to another means victim has possession or control over it (Ricketts v Basildon Magistrate Court)
s5(4) of the theft act 1968 and the case
person given something by mistake and keeping it is keeping property belonging to another person—> v has proprietary interest (Webster)
what does the case of turner establish
owner can be convicted of selling own property if it’s temporary in the possession of another
what does the case of Woodman establish
person can be in control of property even though they don’t know it’s there such as abandoned property
what is the mens rea for theft
under S2 d must be dishonest
what was established in Ivey v Genting Casinos and recently confirmed in Barton & Booth
the two stage test
what is the first element of the two stage test
jury must decide what was the actual knowledge or belief of D as to the facts
subjective test
what is the second element of the two stage test
jury must decide whether da behaviour would be regarded as dishonest by the reasonable, ordinary, decent person
objective
what are the sections that suggest that a persons appropriation will NOT be dishonest
S2(1)(a)
s2(1)(b)
s2(1)(c)
what does s2(1)(a) state about honesty and the cases
honest belief that they have legal right to it
small and holden
what does s2(1)(b) state about honesty and the cases
dishonest belief owner would consent
Holden
what does s2(1)(c) state about honesty and the cases
honest belief that the owner cannot be found bey taking reasonable steps—>
honest belief doesn’t have to be reasonable belief but must be honest
small
S6(1) of the theft act 1968 and the case
do just have intention to permanently deprive meaning intention to dispose of or treat as your own
DPP V lavender
what does the case of Raphael establish
intention to sell or ransom property back to V will be IPD
what does the case of Velumy establish
intention to replace with identical property will not be IPD provided it’s absolutely identical
