Property Offences Scenario Plans

Question 1

Theft - Introduction

Answer 1

Theft is a property offence defined in s(1) of the Theft Act 1968 as ‘dishonestly appropriating property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it’.

Question 2

Theft - Appropriation

Answer 2

In order to establish the actus reus of theft, we must establish whether the defendant has appropriated property belonging to another. Appropriation is explained in s(3) of the statute as ‘an assumption by a person of the rights of an owner to an appropriation’, or behaving/dealing with property as if it is your own, as shown in R V Pitham and Hehl. Appropriation takes place the first time D assumes the rights of the owner, as shown in R V Atakpu and Abrahams. This means that a defendant can assume rights later, for example failing to return a borrowed dress and selling it.

Question 3

*Theft - Consent

Answer 3

Appropriation can take place with consent, if the act is dishonest, as shown in R V Gomez. Gifts may also amount to theft as shown in R V Hinks, where the grantee may have been dishonest in acquiring the gift.

Question 4

Theft - Property

Answer 4

For the next part of the actus reus, it must be established that it is property that has been appropriated. This is explained in s(4) of the Theft Act 1968. Property is defined to be money, real property, personal property, things in action or other intangible property. Things that cannot be stolen include land, wild plants, and knowledge as shown in Oxford V Moss.

Question 5

Theft - Belonging to Another

Answer 5

Furthermore, it must be established that the property appropriated is belonging to another as explained under s(5). This includes physical ownership, as well as control, possession or a proprietary interest as shown in R V Webster. If property is left for another, they remain under the ownership of the original party - as shown in R V Turner, and sometimes property is under obligation, this means it must be used in a particular way, or it becomes theft, as shown in Davidge V Bunnett. APPLY

Question 6

Theft - Dishonest Act to Permanently Deprive

Answer 6

In order to find a defendant guilty for theft, the mens rea must also be established. The mens rea for theft tells us that the act must be dishonest and with the intention of permanently depriving the other. The motive of the act is not relevant in establishing dishonesty. R V Barton and Booth establish the test for dishonesty, asking two questions: what were D’s actual state of belief of the fact, and was D’s conduct dishonest by ordinary standards. However s2(1) of the act states that an act is not dishonest if the defendant believes: they have the right to deprive, they would have consent, or the owner cant be discovered. If the jury decides the defendant had a genuine belief in one of these factors - this is enough to satisfy regardless of how unreasonable it is, as shown in R V Small. APPLY