Theft

Question 1

Definition

Answer 1

s1(1) of the Theft Act states that theft is Dishonestly appropriating property belonging to another with intention to permanently deprive the other of it.

Question 2

Appropriation

Answer 2

s3(1) Theft Act 1968 Appropriation means any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner
R v Morris: D only has to assume one of V’s rights for appropriation to take place
R v Pitham and Hale: D’s assumed the right to sell V’s property
Lawrence v MPC: Even if V consents, there can still be appropriation if the consent is not genuine based on the true situation
R v Hinks: Even accepting a valid gift can amount to appropriation

Question 3

Property

Answer 3

s4(1) of TA - ‘Property’ includes:
Money e.g. cash
Real property e.g. houses, land and things connected to it
Personal property e.g. “things” such as cars, jewellery
Things in action e.g. money you can’t touch
Intangible property e.g. Copyright, Patents
Real property:
s4(2) states a person cannot steal land except where
1. someone severs anything considered part of the land from the land e.g. a tree
2. A tenant takes a fixture or structure from the land let to him e.g. lighting, taps, doors
3. Someone legally entrusted to look after land abuses this power e.g. Selling land a trustee should be looking after.
R v Welsh- bodily fluids can be property
R v Kelly and Lindsay- A corpse and body parts are not property but can become property if they acquire value through education
Oxford v Moss- Information/Knowledge cannot be stolen
R v Akbar- exam papers are personal property

Question 4

Belonging to another

Answer 4

s5(1) BTA means having anyone with possession or control of the property or with a proprietary interest in the property.
R v Turner- D stole his own car from the garage as it was still in the possession of the garage as he hadn’t paid.
Rickets v Basildon Magistrates- Bags in bins were Oxfam’s, bags outside the shop were still the original owners as they had a proprietary interest in the property until his intention was fulfilled.
s5(3): If the property is given to D and is under legal obligation to use it in a particular way, that property will still be treated as belonging to the giver.
Davidge v Burnett- D used the money given to him by V for a use that wasn’t the intended use from V.
s5(4) If D is given property by mistake and is under a legal obligation to return it, that property will still belong to the party that made the mistake. Att. Gen (No 1 of 1983).

Question 5

Dishonesty

Answer 5

s2 gives 3 circumstances where you can prove you aren’t being dishonest
a) s2(1)(a) Not dishonest if D believes he has a legal right to deprive the other of the property like in Robinson
b) s2(1)(b) Not dishonest if D believes the owner would have consented to the appropriation if they knew the circumstances like in Holden
c) s2(1)(c) Not dishonest if D believes the owner cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps like in Small.
s2(2) says D may still be dishonest even though he is willing to pay for the property
WHE NONE APPLY:
Ivey test:
1. Decide what D knows about the circumstances
2. and then whether the SC felt his conduct was dishonest in those circumstances according to the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people.
As Ivey v Gentling casinos was CIVIL, R v Barton and Booth made this test also apply to criminal cases.

Question 6

Intention to permanently deprive

Answer 6

s6(1) sys it means Intending to treat the property as ones own to dispose of, regardless of owners rights. DPP v Lavender
s6(1) also says borrowing can amount to an intent to perm deprive if property is kept for such time and in such circumstances that make it equivalent to outright taking/disposal.
R v Lloyd says borrowing can amount to theft if the goodness virtue and value is taken from the property.
R v Velumyl- If you return something it must be precisely what you took.
R v Easom- conditional intent is not good enough to be Mr for theft.