Theft Flashcards

(45 cards)

1
Q
A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is the maximum sentence for theft?

A

Theft carries a maximum sentence of 7 years imprisonment.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What are the elements of theft?

A

The elements of theft include: appropriation, property, belonging to another, dishonesty, and intention to permanently deprive.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What is defined in section 3 of the Theft Act?

A

Appropriation is defined as ‘Any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner amounts to an appropriation.’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What was the significance of the case Pitham and Hehl (1977)?

A

In Pitham and Hehl, D offered to sell furniture belonging to another, and the Court decided that appropriation was complete at that point.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What was the ruling in Morris (1983)?

A

In Morris, the Court ruled that assuming any one right of the owner is enough for theft, even if the item was not taken from the store.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What is meant by ‘later appropriation’?

A

Later appropriation refers to situations where D comes by property innocently and later assumes the right to it by keeping or dealing with it as owner.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Can appropriation occur with the owner’s consent?

A

Yes, an appropriation can take place even with the consent of the owner.

Refer to Lawrence (1972) and Gomez (1993).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What was the outcome of the Lawrence case (1972)?

A

The Court decided that the taxi driver’s actions amounted to theft, despite the student’s consent.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What happened in the Gomez case (1993)?

A

D convinced the shop owner to accept stolen cheques, leading to a ruling that appropriation can occur even with the owner’s consent obtained by deception.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What was the significance of the Hinks case (2001)?

A

The Court confirmed that appropriation can occur regardless of whether it is a gift, as seen when D received £60,000 from a victim of low intelligence.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What is the definition of ‘property’ under s.4?

A

‘Property’ includes money and all other property real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What types of property can be stolen?

A

Personal property (like possessions), real property (land and buildings), and other intangible property (like patents).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What are ‘things in action’?

A

Rights enforceable by court action, such as a bank transfer.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What is included in personal property?

A

Possessions, including dead bodies, body parts, hair, urine, etc.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What things cannot be stolen?

A

Confidential information, fungus, flowers, fruit and foliage (if growing wild), and wild creatures (if not tamed or in captivity).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What was the outcome of Oxford v Moss (1979)?

A

D could not be charged with theft of the information on the exam paper, as he returned it after reading the questions.

If he had kept the exam paper, it would have been theft of the paper itself.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

How is ‘belonging to another’ defined in property offences?

A

‘Belonging to another’ is defined very widely in s.5: ‘Property shall be regarded as belonging to any person having possession or control over it, or having any proprietary right or interest.’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What was the ruling in Turner (1971)?

A

D was found guilty of theft for taking his own car from a garage without paying, as the garage had possession of the car and the right to retain it until repairs were paid for.

20
Q

Can someone be in possession or control without knowing it?

A

Yes, it is possible to be in possession or control without knowing it.

21
Q

What happened in Woodman (1974)?

A

A company was convicted of theft for scrap metal taken by D, even though the company was unaware it was there, as they had control over it.

The scrap metal had been left by a purchaser who did not want that bit.

22
Q

What was the outcome of Ricketts v Basildon Magistrates’ Court (2010)?

A

D took bags of goods that had been deposited outside a charity shop and from bins at the rear. The bags outside remained the property of the giver until the charity shop took possession.

23
Q

What is proprietary interest?

A

Once someone has a proprietary right or interest, it does not matter that someone exists who has a better right.

24
Q

Can a person be guilty of theft if they possess property that someone else has a proprietary interest in?

A

Yes, a person can be guilty of theft even if they have possession and control of the property.

25
What was the case of Webster (2006) about?
D was awarded a medal but the Ministry of Defence sent him two by mistake. It was theft when D tried to sell one on eBay because the MoD retained a proprietary interest.
26
What does S.5(3) state about property received under an obligation?
If property is received by D and D is under an obligation to deal with it in a particular way, it may be theft if D fails to do so.
27
What was the outcome of Hall (1972)?
D's obligation was not clear, so it was not theft when he was unable to return the money.
28
What was the outcome of Klineberg (1999)?
D was guilty of theft when he failed to pay the deposit into the trust fund because his obligation was clear.
29
What happened in Davidge v Bunnett (1984)?
D was guilty of theft for spending money given by flatmates to pay the gas bill on Christmas presents instead.
30
What does S.5(4) state about property received by mistake?
If a person receives property by mistake and is under a legal obligation to return it, the property is regarded as belonging to the person entitled to its return.
31
What was the case of A-G's Reference (No.1 of 1983) (1985) about?
D was overpaid by her employers and decided not to repay the money. The Court decided D was legally obliged to return it under s.5(4).
32
What is the distinction between lost and abandoned property?
Lost property still belongs to the original owner and can be stolen, while abandoned property cannot be the subject of theft.
33
What was the outcome of Small (1988)?
The Court decided there was no theft as the car had been abandoned, and D was not dishonest.
34
What must D be when appropriating property?
D must be dishonest.
35
What are the three situations that are NOT considered dishonest under s.2?
1. D believes he has a legal right to deprive the other. 2. D believes in the other's consent. 3. D believes the owner cannot be found by taking reasonable steps.
36
What matters in determining dishonesty according to s.2?
It is what D honestly believed that matters, not the actual state of affairs; it is a subjective test.
37
What was the outcome in Holden (1991)?
D was acquitted as he honestly believed he had a right to take the scrap tyres.
38
What is the Ivey / Barton & Booth test?
1. What was the defendant's actual state of knowledge or belief as to the facts? 2. Was his conduct dishonest by the standards of ordinary decent people?
39
What does the ruling in Barton & Booth (2020) clarify about dishonesty?
Dishonesty remains a test of D's state of mind, knowledge, and belief, but is now also assessed by the standards of ordinary people.
40
What happens if a person shows one of the three beliefs in s.2(1)?
They are not dishonest and must be acquitted of theft.
41
Can an appropriation still be considered dishonest if the accused was willing to pay?
Yes, according to s.2(2), an appropriation can still be dishonest even if the accused was willing to pay.
42
What indicates an intention to permanently deprive?
An intention to permanently deprive exists if D intends the owner to lose their property forever.
43
What does s.6 clarify about intention to permanently deprive?
D may intend to permanently deprive without meaning the owner to permanently lose the thing itself.
44
What was the outcome in Velumyl (1989)?
D was guilty as he intended to permanently deprive his employer of the original notes and coins.
45
What was the ruling in Lavender (1994)?
D had an intention to permanently deprive as he treated the doors as his own to dispose of, regardless of the rights of the council.