Property Offences Flashcards
What Act is burglary included in?
Theft Act 1968 (s9,10)
What section is Burglary at entry?
s9 (1 a)
What is the AR for Burglary at Entry?
AR: Enters as a trespasser
What is the MR for Burglary at Entry?
MR: Intention or recklessness as to trespass, intention to commit theft, GBH or unlawful damage
What was the OLD R v Collins test?
‘an effective and substantial entry’
R v Brown (1985)
There has to be an “effective” entry
Brown broke the window of an Argos shop and stuck his upper body through
The entry does not need to be “substantial”
Withdrawal of permission
R v Collins (1973)
Has to be a reasonable amount of time before the entrant becomes a trespasser
R v Jones; R v Smith (1976)
Argued they had unconditional consent to enter their father’s house
The court held that they waived this right through theft
AR of traspassing
AR: enters a piece of land without legal authorisation from the owner or a member of the owners family
MR of trespassing
MR: intention or recklessness as to the entry
What section is Burglary while inside?
s9 (1b)
Burglary while inside AR
AR: Once in building there is theft/attempted theft, GBH or attempted GBH
This does not include criminal damage
Burglary while inside MR
MR: Wilson and Jenkins (1983) suggests that there does not need to be proof of an MR
However this is contended by Spencer and Vigro (1983) that at least subjective recklessness needs to be present to be convicted of GHB
What section is Aggravated Burglary?
s10 (2)
What is the AR of Aggravated Burglary?
Burglary + the possession of a firearm, weapon or explosive/ the appearance of a firearm
R v Russell (1985)
Does not need to be shown that the firearm was to be used in the course of the burglary, but it has to be shown that it has to be used at some point
Theory: Maguire ad Bennet
Violation of the victim’s private home
Theory: Cook and Ludwig
In burglary increased likelihood of harm and violence
What is Robbery?
Theft + Force / Threat of Force
R v Dawson 1976
The force only needs to be minimal. In this case a nudge of the shoulder to take a wallet
R v Hale (1979)
The force has to occur at the time or immediately after the theft
Broke into a woman’s home, took jewellery and then tied her up. This was robbery
Theory: Lacey, Wells and Quick
The law not only defends property, but also defends a social order
Hence Proudhon
famously declared that property was theft
The force has to occur at the time or immediately after the theft
Broke into a woman’s home, took jewellery and then tied her up. This was robbery
R v Hale (1979)
The force only needs to be minimal. In this case a nudge of the shoulder to take a wallet
R v Dawson 1976
Argued they had unconditional consent to enter their father’s house
The court held that they waived this right through theft
R v Jones; R v Smith (1976)
Does not need to be shown that the firearm was to be used in the course of the burglary, but it has to be shown that it has to be used at some point
R v Russell (1985)
There has to be an “effective” entry
Brown broke the window of an Argos shop and stuck his upper body through
The entry does not need to be “substantial”
R v Brown (1985)
‘an effective and substantial entry’
What was the OLD R v Collins test?
s9 (1 a)
What section is Burglary at entry?
s9 (1b)
What section is Burglary while inside?
Which Act is criminal damage under?
Criminal Damage Act (1971)
Defendant intentionally or…….destroying or…..property……..without…….
Recklessly
Damaging
Belonging to another
Without lawful excuse
AR of Criminal Damage
Damaging or destroying any property belonging to another
MR of Criminal damage
Intent or recklessness as to the damage/ownership
Defences for criminal damage
A) Honestly believed the owner was consenting
B) In protection of yours or another’s property
Roe v Kingerlee (1986)
Graffiti which could be removed easily constituted criminal damage
Jaggard v Dickinson (1981)
Broke into her “friends” house after she became stranded on a night out
Turns out it was another house
Reckless as to the ownership
Blake v DPP (1993)
Vicar engraved a biblical quote onto a concrete pillar in protest against the Gulf War
Claimed consent from G-d
Need to have a honest belief that the owner was consenting
Werie v DPP (2012)
Not realising it is a criminal offence is not enough
Theft D.... A.... P... B... PD...
Dishonestly Appropriates Property Belonging to another With an intention to permanently deprive
Dishonesty exceptions
A)
B)
C)
A) Honestly believes entitled to deal with the property
B) Honestly believes the owner would consent
C) Honestly believes that the property is abandoned
DOES NOT HAVE TO BE REASONABLE BELIEF
Honesty in Common Law
R v ….
A)
B)
R v Ghosh (1982)
A) Was what the defendant did dishonest according to the standards of reasonable and honest people?
B) Would the defendant realise the reasonable and honest person would regard what he did as dishonest?
Lord Lane CJ
R v Ghosh (1982)
Defendant consultant claimed fees for operations he didn’t carry out
Led to the common law test for dishonesty
Real property;
Personal property;
Things in action;
Intangible property;
Real property; land and immovable things
Personal property; moveable
Things in action; stocks, shares, cheques, cash
Intangible property - patents and copyrights
Cannot steal information
Case:
Oxford v Moss (1979)
Copying an exam question cannot be an intention to permanently deprive
R v Welsh (1974)
Gave urine to the police then ran off with it
Theft
Yaerworth v NHS (2009)
Discusses the ownership of sperm in banks
R (Ricketts) v Basildon Magistrates
Clothes left outside a charity shop
It was theft taking them
The property belonged to another
Smith (Michael Andres) 2011
Can steal illegal goods
Defendant was convicted of stealing illegal drugs
R v Turner (1971)
Can be convicted of stealing your own property
Drove his car away from a garage without paying
Convicted of theft
This would be different now
R v Wain (1995)
Collected money on a charities behalf
Treated as a trustee and therefore not using it for the correct purpose was theft
Attorney Generals Reference (No 1) 1983
A police officer was overpaid her salary
Didn’t pay it back, theft
Lord Lane - MR began when she first realised
R v Small (1987)
Took a car which he believed to be abandoned because the keys had been left in it for over a week
Not guilty because an HONEST belief was enough
R v Lavender (1994)
Movement of victims car was theft
R v Mitchell (2008)
Moved the car
Left Hazard lights on
There was no intention to permanently deprive
R v Velumyl (1989)
Stealing of money from employers safe
He did not intend to return that EXACT money
Which Act is relevant to theft?
Theft Act 1968 s1
