Chapter 9 key cases (offences agaisnt property) Flashcards
1
Q
R v Vinall (2011)
A
- The defendants encountered two cyclists, abused them, pushed one of them off their bike and chased them for a short distance.
- The defendants then walked away and took one of their bikes.
- The police then stopped them.
- The appeal against conviction raised issues of appropriation, intention permanently to deprive and the time at which force was used in determining whether robbery had been committed.
- The court of appeal stated either of two actions could be regarded as appropriation, sufficiently assuming of the rights of owner:
. the initial taking of the bike
. the subsequent act of taking the bike
2
Q
R v Pitham and Hehl (1977)
A
- The defendants ‘sold’ furniture belonging to another person and in that persons house.
- This was held to be an appropriation.
- It did not matter whether or not the furniture was moved from the house and the owner was never deprived of the property.
3
Q
R v Morris (1983)
A
- Morris had switched the price labels of two items on the shelf in a supermarket.
- He had then put one of the items, which now had a lower price on it and took it to checkout, but had not gone through the checkout when he was arrested.
- His conviction for theft was upheld as he has switched the labels of two items on the shelf in a supermarket.
- He has assumed on owners rights.
4
Q
R v Gomez (1933)
A
- The defendant worked as a shop assistant.
- He has persuaded the manager to accept, in payment for goods, two cheques which he knew to be stolen and has no value.
- The court stated that an act expressly or impliedly authorised by the owner of goods or consented to by him or her could amount to appropriation of the goods within the meaning of the theft act 1968.
5
Q
R v Hinks (2000)
A
- The defendant (38) was friendly with john (53) who was off limited intelligence.
- The defendant described herself as the his main carer.
- John withdrew £60,000 from his building society account and deposited them in defendants account.
- During that year he made withdrawals of £300 every day so that he lost most of his savings and money inherited from his father.
- The house of lords decided that even though there was a valid gift, there was an appropriation.
- The question remained as to whether the jury would see the act as dishonest for there to be theft.
6
Q
R v Kelly and Lindsay (1998)
A
- Kelly was a sculptor who asked Lindsay to take body parts from the Royal college of surgeons where he worked as an assistan.
- Kelly made casts of the parts.
- They were convicted of theft and appealed on the point of law that body parts were not property.
- The court of appeal held that, though a dead body, the body parts were property as virtue of the application of skill, such as dissection, for exhibition of teaching purposes
7
Q
R v Turner (1971)
A
- The defendant left his car at a garage for repairs.
- It was agreed that he would pay when he collected the car.
- When the repairs were almost finished the car was left outside the garage premises.
- The defendant used a spare key to take the car without paying for the repairs in the middle of the night.
- The garage was in possession of the car because as repairers they had the right to retain possession of the item till the payment was made.
- The defendant was convicted of theft.
8
Q
R v Webster (2006)
A
- The defendant was an army sergeant who had served in iraq.
- He had been awarded for his service there.
- By mistake they sent him a second medal.
- He sold the second medal on ebay.
- He was convicted of theft of the medal.
- On appeal his conviction was upheld on the basis that the ministry of defence had retained an equitable interest in the medal.
9
Q
Davidge v Bunnett (1984)
A
- The defendant was given money by her flatmates too pay the gass bill but instead she used it to buy her christmas presents.
- There was a legal obligation to deal weigh the money, as she had not fulfilled that obligation she was guilty of theft.
10
Q
R v Holden (1991)
A
- The defendant was charged with theft of scrap tyres and fitting company where he worked.
- He had claimed that other people had taken the tyres without permission of the supervisor.
- However, taking tyres was a dismissible offence under his contract of employment.
- His conviction was quashed as the defendant subjectively believed he had the right to take them.
11
Q
DPP v Lavender (1994)
A
- The defendant took doors from a council property which was being repaired and used them to replace damaged doors in his girlfriend’s flat.
- The doors were still in possession of the council but had been transferred without permission from one council property to another.
- Here he was dealing with the doors as his own by moving them from one property to another without permission from the council.
- Here he was dealing with the doors as his own by moving them from one property to another without permission.
12
Q
R v Easom (1971)
A
- The defendant picked up a handbag in the cinema, rummaged through the contents without having taken anything.
- His conviction for theft of the handbag and the contents were quashed.
- There was no evidence that the defendant had intended to permanently deprive the owner of the nag or items in it so he could not be guilty of theft.
13
Q
R v Waters (2015)
A
- There was hostility between a group of young people in a park.
- The defendants snatched one of the girls phone and said she could have it back if one of her friends spoke to him.
- The police were immediately called and charged and convicted him of robbery.
- The court of appeal quashed the conviction because the evidence did not establish an intention to permanently deprive her of the phone.
- The defendants condition for returning the phone could have been fulfilled in the near future.
- This meant there was no robbery.
14
Q
Corcoran v Anderson (1980)
A
- One of the defendants hit the victim in the back of the head and tugged at her bag.
- She let go of the bag and let it fall to the group, because the victim was screaming the defendant ran off without the bag.
- It was held that the theft was complete so the defendants were guilty of robbery.
15
Q
R v Brown (1985)
A
- The defendant was standing on the ground outside but leaning in through a shop window, rummaging through goods.
- His conviction for burglary was upheld as clearly in this situation his entry was effective.
