Which Act does Theft come under and what section numbers is it ?
(s.1)-(s.6) of the Theft Act (1968)
What is the definition of theft ?
What section number is this under ?
-(s.1) ‘A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it’
What ar the actus reus elements to be proven for theft ?
What section numbers are these under ?
-(s.3) Appropriation
-(s.4) Property
-(s.5) Belonging to another
What are the mens rea elements to be proven for theft ?
What section numbers are these under ?
-(s.2) Dishonesty
-(s.6) Intention to permanently deprive
What is the definition of appropriation under s.3 ?
Which case comes under this area ?
-‘Any assumption of the rights of the owner’
Pitham v Hehl
What other actus reus elements must be considered, under thee act, for appropriation ?
What section numbers are these under ?
-s.3(1) Appropriation by ‘innocent’ acquisition, keeping and dealing
s.3(2) Appropriation and the ‘bona fide’ purchaser
What other common law actus reus elements must be considered, for appropriation ?
Which cases established these ?
-No need to touch/handle property to appropriate (Rv McPherson)
-Appropriation, and label swapping (Rv Morris)
-Appropriation can occur with consent (Rv Lawrence)
-Appropriation and consent without deception (Rv Hinks)
What is the definition of property under s.4 ?
“Money and all other property, real or personal including things in action and other intangible property”
What is property that can be stolen under s.4 ?
Which cases come under these areas ?
-Money
-Real property
-Personal property (R v Kelly & Lindsay)
-Things in action (R v Kohn)
-Other intangible property (AG of Hong Kong v Chan Nai-Keung)
What ‘property’, under ‘exeptions’ can be stolen ?
What section numbers do these come under ?
-s.4(2)(a),(b),(c) Land and certain interests in land
-s.4(3) Flowers, fruit or foliage taken for reward or sale
What is ‘property’ that cannot be stolen, under s.4 ?
Which cases come under these areas ?
-Electricity (Low v Blease)
-Confidential information (Oxford v Moss)
-Wild creatures (unless reduced into possession)
-Bodies and body parts (unless held or controlled) (Kelly v Lindsay)
What is the definition of ‘belonging to another’ under s.5 ?
‘Anyone having possession, control, or proprietary interest, in the property may be considered as who it belongs to’
What other actus reus elements, under the act, must be considered for ‘belonging to another’ ?
What section numbers do these come under, and which cases show these ?
-s.5(3) Legal obligation to deal with property in a specific way (Davidge v Bunnett)
-s.5(4) Property got by mistake (Rv Gresham)
What are the two scenarios in which an individual has a legal obligation to return goods obtained by mistake ?
Which cases come under these areas ?
-Extra change after a sale (Rv Gilks)
-Extra wage or salary (AG Ref No.1)(1993)
What common law actus reus elements, must be considered, for ‘belonging to another’ ?
-Includes possession or control (R v Rostron)
-Possession or control of property does not have to
be lawful
-Wide interpretation of ‘belonging to’ (Rv Turner)
What is the ruling for both lost and abandoned property ?
Which case shows this ?
-Lost property can be stolen, as it ‘belongs to another’, whereas abandoned property doesn’t, so it cannot be stolen.
Ricketts v Basildon Magistrates (2011)
How is ‘dishonesty’ established in the act ?
-The ‘negative definitions’ given in s.2(1)
What are the ‘negative definitions’, given to establish that an individual would not be dishonest ?
What section numbers do these come under, and what cases show these ?
-s.2(1)(a) Where he believes he has a legal right to deprive the other of it (Rv Holden)
-s.2(1)(b) Where he believes the owner would have allowed them to have the property (Boggeln v Williams)
-s.2(1)(c) Where he believes the true owner cannot be found by taking reasonable steps (Rv Small)
How is dishonesty established through common law ?
Which two cases defined this ?
-The ‘Ivey two-part test’
-Ivey v Genting Casinos
-Rv Barton and Booth
What is the two-part ‘Ivey test’ ?
a. Was the defendants state of knowledge or beliefs as to the facts ?
b. In the context of (a), as the defendant dishonest, by the standards of the ordinary reasonable man ?
What is the ruling for ‘conditional intent’, in regards to ITPD ?
Which case comes under this area ?
-Conditional intent, does not suffice for theft, as an intention to permenently deprive, cannot be proven
Rv Easom
What is the ruling for ‘borrowed property’, in regards to ITPD ?
Which case comes under this area ?
-An intention to permenently deprive, can only be proven if the item has ‘wholly diminished in value so all goodness and virtue have gone’
Rv Lloyd
What is the ruling for ‘intention to replace with identical property’, in regards to ITPD ?
Which case comes under this area ?
An intention to replace with identical property, will satisfy intention to permenently deprive, as the owner is deprived of specific property
Rv Velumyl
