theft elements Flashcards
Define appropriation
s3 (1) - any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner amounts to an appropriation and this includes where he has come by the property (innocently or not) without stealing it, any later assumption of a right to keeping or dealing with it as an owner
what is appropriation?
the act of taking something and dealing with property as if you own it
give examples of appropriation
destroying property, picking up an item, throwing items away, taking an item, worthless cheques, receiving gifts for others and keeping them
how did the definition of appropriation change
s 3(1) replaced the word of taking with appropriation
this can be any rights of ownership rather than all.
can take a wide definition of the word
R v Vinall (2011)
Legal principle: the D must assume at least one right of ownership
The defendants were seen by 2 cyclists who they subjected to verbal abuse and then punched one on the bike, made threats and chased them. The Ds walked away and picked up a bike and left it as a nearby bus station (problems: intention to perm deprive? robbery?)
act of appropriation:
- the initial taking of the bike
- the act of abandoning the bike
R v Pitham and Hehl (1977)
Legal principle: appropriation can be assuming the right to sell the property even if it is never removed
D ‘sold’ furniture belonging to another person and in that persons house. This was held to be appropriation, the offer to sell was an assumption of the rights of an owner and the appropriation took place ATP. it didn’t matter if it wasn’t removed, even if the owner was never deprived of the property, D had still appropriated it by assuming the rights of the owner to offer the furniture for sale
R v Morris (1983)
Legal principle: it does not have to be ALL rights of ownership that are assumed,
D had switched the price labels of two items on the shelf in a shop, he had then put one of the items (lower price) in to a basket provided by the store for shoppers and taken the item to checkout where he was arrested. Rights to put a price labels on the goods was a right that had been assumed
Lawrence v Commissioner for Metropolitan police (1972)
Legal principle: appropriation can happen even with the owners consent
An Italian student, who spoke little English, arrived at Victoria station and showed an address to Lawrence, (taxi driver) the journey cost 50p but Lawrence told him it was expensive. The student got out £1 for Lawrence but he said it was not enough so the student opened his wallet and allowed Lawrence to take out a further £6.
R v Gomez (1993)
D was a shop assistant, he had persuaded the manager to accept in payment for goods, 2 cheques which he knew were stolen and had no value, the court found this act expressly or impliedly authorised by the owner of goods or consented to by him or her could amount to an appropriation of the goods
R v Hinks (2000)
The defendant (H) was a carer for a man of limited intelligence (D). H persuaded D to make a series of payments to her from his bank account which she contended were gifts. H was charged with theft.
Legal principle: appropriation can still happen if its a valid gift
R v Atakpu and Abrahams (1994)
The defendants hired cars in Germany and Belgium under false driving licences and passports. They were arrested in Dover and charged with theft. The Court of Appeal quashed the convictions because the moment of appropriation under the law in Gomez was when they obtained the cars. So the thefts occurred outside the jurisdiction of the English courts and as the defendants had already stolen the cars in Belgium and Germany, keeping and driving them to England was a new appropriation- a later assumption of the right of an owner or a continuing act.
the appropriation happens the first time a right of ownership is assumed.
A later assumption of a right
s 3(1) states that an appropriation can also happen when a defendant acquires a property without stealing it, but then later decides to keep or deal with it as an owner.
The appropriation happens at the point of ‘keeping’ or ‘dealing’.
This can be borrowing an item and then selling it on.
Being lent something and keeping it.
Intending to give something back and then not.
Selling a hired car
what is property?
s(4) gives a comprehension definition of property
“property includes money and all other property real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property.”
Money- coins and banknotes of any currency
Real property
Personal property- all moveable items such as books, jewellery, clothes and cars, as well as trivial items
Intangible property- intellectual property
R v Kelly and Lindsay
Kelly was a sculptor who asked Lindsay to take body parts from the Royal College of Surgeons where he worked as a laboratory assistant. Kelly made casts of the parts. They were convicted of theft and appealed on a point of law that the body parts were not property. The Court of Appeal held that, though the dead body was not normally property within the definition of the Theft Act 1968, the body parts were property as they has acquired ‘different attributes by virtue of the application of skill, such as dissection or preservation techniques, for exhibition or teaching purposes.’
Regenerative parts (hair) R v Herbert (1961)
Blood R v Rothery (1976)
Urine R v Welsh (1974)
Real property: can land and buildings be stolen?
Land and buildings
s4(1)- land can be stolen
s4(2)- in these circumstances:
When a trustee takes part of the property without permission
Someone severs anything forming part of the land from the land
When a tenant takes a fixture or fitting from the property
things in action:
This is theoretical property that you have legal right to own.
The money in your bank account
The credit on your credit card
You have the right to go into the bank and ask for all the money you have in physical notes and coins.
A cheque would class as a thing in action and personal property
intangible property:
Items that have no physical presence
There is a separate offence for theft of electricity
The courts have acknowledge that confidential information cannot be stolen.
Oxford v Moss
D was a university student who acquired a proof of an examination paper he was due to sit. It was accepted that D did not intent to permanently deprive the university of the piece of paper on which the questions were printed. But he was charged with theft of confidential information (the knowledge of the questions). He was found not guilty.
Confidential information cannot be stolen
things that cannot be stolen:
ss 4(3) and 4(4)
Wild plants
Blackberries in a hedgerow
Mushrooms
Apples in a wild orchard
There can be no sale, reward or commercial purposes
belonging to another:
s5(1) gives a wide definition of ‘belonging to another’
“Property shall be regarded as belonging to any person having possession or control of it, or having in it any proprietary right or interest (not being an equitable interest arising only from an agreement to transfer or grant an interest).”
This broad definition means the court does not have to prove who the legal owner is in most cases.
Possession or control
In some situations, other people, not just the owner, can have possession and control of an item.
When someone hires a car (the D can be charged with stealing it from the owner or from the hire customer)
The possession does not have to be lawful- this is helpful when it’s not known who the original owner is.
R v Turner
D left his car at a garage for repairs. It was agreed that he would pay for the repairs when he collected the car after the repairs had been completed. When the repairs were almost finished, the garage left the car parked on the roadway outside its premises. D used a spare key to take the car during the night without paying for the repairs. The Court of Appeal held that the garage was in possession or control of the car because, as repairers, it has a right to retain possession of the item being repaired until payment is made (a repairer’s lien).
Unfortunately, it was not the reason given by the Court of Appeal, which relied on the simple words of the statute that property belongs to anyone in possession or control. This implies that an owner of property could be guilty of theft of his or her own property (dishonesty might be an issue, though) even if V had no right to stop him or her taking it back (e.g. if he or she took it back maliciously, leaving V to believe that it had been taken by someone else. On these grounds, the Court of Appeal upheld his conviction.
the person in control may not be the owner
R v Woodman
A company had sold all the scrap metal on its site to another company which arranged for it to be removed. However, a small amount of the scrap had been left on the site. The company was in control of the site itself as it had put a fence round it and had notices warning trespassers to keep out. D took the remaining scrap metal. He was convicted of theft even through the company was unaware there was any scrap left.
Its possible to be in control of property you don’t know exists
R v Basildon Magistrates
In the first offence, Ricketts had taken bags containing items of property from outside a charity shop. He argued that the original owner had abandoned the property and, therefore, it did not belong to another. The court ruled that the goods had not been abandoned - the giver had attempted to deliver them to the charity and delivery would only be complete when the charity took possession. Until then, they were the property of the giver.
In the second offence, Ricketts had taken bags of goods from a bin at the rear of another charity shop. These goods were still in the possession of the charity at the time they were appropriated by Ricketts.
