Implied terms Flashcards
What are the three property offences?
Theft
Robbery
Burglary
What Act lays out theft?
S.1 of the Theft Act 1968
What is theft defined as in S.1(1) of the Theft Act 1968?
A person is guilty of theft is he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it
What are the 5 key elements of theft and their sections of the Theft Act?
S.2 - Dishonesty (MR)
S.3 - Appropriate (AR)
S.4 - Property (AR)
S.5 - Belonging to another (AR)
S.6 - With intention of permanently depriving the other (MR)
What are the three elements which make up the actus reus of theft?
Appropriation S.3
Property S.4
Belonging to another S.5
What is meant by Appropriation as an element of the AR for theft?
Any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner amounts to appropriation + where property r a right or interest in property is or purports to be transferred for value to a person acting in good faith, no later assumption by him of rights which he believed himself to be acquiring shall, by reason of any defect in the transferor’s title, amount to theft of the property
What three cases cover the assumption of rights of the owner?
R v Morris
Lawrence v MPC
R v Hinks
What hapened in the case of R v Morris?
The D was convicted of theft after switching the labels on products in supermarkets to obtain a lower price. One of the D’s was caught before he paid and one was caught after he paid. Conviction was upheld as the owner of the goods had a right to ensure that they were sold for the price the owner chose, which the D usurped when they switched the labels to be able to pay less
What happened in the case of Lawrence v MPC?
An Italian man who spoke little English, arrived at Victoria station on his first visit to the country. He got a taxi and gave the driver a piece of paper on which had an address written. The driver told him it would be a long and expensive trip. On arrival at the destination, the Italian took
What happened in the case of R v Hinks?
the D was a career for a man of limited intelligence. The D persuaded the V to make a series of payments to her from his bank account which she contended were gifts. The D was charged with theft. A gift could be appropriation where the grantee had acted dishonestly. The act doesn’t require to be unlawful under the general law to constitute an appropriation
What is classed as property under S.4(1) of the Theft Act 1968?
Money
Personal Property
Real property e.g. land and buildings
Things in action e.g. a bank account
Other intangible property rights which have no physical presence but can be stolen e.g. copyright
Would picking flowers from the forest consitute as theft?
Picking the flowers wouldn’t constitute a theft but if the D went on to sell these flowers for a profit, then this would be theft
S.4(3) Theft Act states various ‘things’ that cant be stolen, give 2 examples:
Picking wild blackberries( unless intend to sell them)
Electricity (but S.11 Theft Act dishonestly using electricity without due authority)
What happened in the case of Oxford v Moss?
The D was a civil engineering student who dishonestly obtained the proof of an examination paper. After he had read the paper he returned it. He was charged by the university authorities with theft of confidential information. On appeal, it was held that whilst D’s conduct was to be condemned and would be described by a layman as cheating, the confidential information so obtained by him did not fall within the definition of intangible property and so couldn’t be the subject-matter of a charge of theft
What happened in R v Marshall?
The D was found obtaining underground tickets from members of the public passing through the barriers, and reselling them to other potential customers. Courts held that the tickets remained the property of the London Underground and that there had been an appropriation with intent to permanently deprive. The conviction was upheld as the D had intended to treat the tickets as his own to dispose regardless of the others rights
What is meant by ‘belonging to another’ ?
The owner of the property - normally has possession and control of it. This can be confusing
What two cases illustrate ‘belonging to another’ as part of the actus reus for theft?
R v Turner No.2
R v Woodman
What happened in the case of R v Turner?
The D took his car in to a service station for repairs. When he went to pick it up he saw that the case was left outside with the key in. He took the car without paying for the repairs. He was liable for theft of his own car since the car was regarded as belonging to the service station as they were in possession and control of the car
What happened in the case of R v Woodman?
A sold all the scrap metal on certain disused business premises to B, who removed most of it but left some as being too inaccessible to be worth the expense of removal. The D then entered the premises to take some of this scrap and was convicted of theft as the scraps belonged to B
What happens if property is obtained by mistake? Give a case example:
S.5(4) Theft Act 1968 - where a person is given something by mistake and is under an obligation to return it, keeping it may constitute a theft: Ag Ref No.1 1983
What happened in the case of AG Ref No.1 1983?
The D, a police woman, received an overpayment in her wages by mistake. She had noticed that she had received more than she was entitled to but didn’t say anything to her employer. She didn’t withdraw any of the money from her bank account. It was held possible for a theft conviction to arise where the D hadn’t withdrawn the money.
What is meant by dishonesty in terms of the mens rea of theft?
Theft is a crime of specific intent so it’s necessary to prove intention. A person can not recklessly steal. There is no statutory definition of dishonesty, instead, S.2(1) Theft Act 1968 sets out the situations when D would be held to not have ben dishonest.
In what circumstances would the D be held to not have been dishonest when appropriating the property?
S.2(1)(a): you had a genuine belief that you had the legal right to appropriate the property
S.2(1)(b): the owner would have consented
S.2(1)(c): the owner can’t be discovered by taking reasonable steps
What happened in the case of R v Robinson 1977?
The D was owed £7 by a woman. He approached the womans husband brandishing a knife, and a fight ensued during which the womans husband dropped a £5 note. The D picked up the £5 and demanded the remaining £2. The D was convicted of robbery. The conviction was quashed as he honestly believed he was entitled to the money in law, he didn’t have the necessary mens rea for theft