Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Year 2 A-Level Law AQA Textbook > Property Offences: Theft > Flashcards

Property Offences: Theft Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards Civil Procedure 1L flashcards
1
Q

Theft defined in which Act and section?

A

s1(1) Theft Act 1968

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

s1(1) Theft Act 1968

A

Provides definition of theft

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Dishonestly (part of the mens rea)

A

s2 Theft Act 1968

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

s2 Theft Act 1968

A

Dishonestly (part of the mens rea)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Appropriates (part of the actus reus)

A

s3 Theft Act 1968

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

s3 Theft Act 1968

A

Appropriates (part of the actus reus)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Property (part of the actus reus)

A

s4 Theft Act 1968

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

s4 Theft Act 1968

A

Property (part of the actus reus)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Belonging to another (part of the actus reus)

A

s5 Theft Act 1968

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Intention of depriving the other of it (part of the mens rea)

A

s6 Theft Act 1968

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

s5 Theft Act 1968

A

Belonging to another (part of the actus reus)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

s6 Theft Act 1968

A

Intention of depriving the other of it (part of the mens rea)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What are the three actus reus elements of theft?

A

1) Appropriation s3
2) Property s4
3) Belonging to another s5

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What are the two mens rea elements to theft?

A

A) Dishonestly s2

B) Intention of depriving the other of it s6

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What is appropriation?

A

Any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What case is an example of appropriation?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Vinall (2011)

Facts: D’s robbed a bike and abandoned it. The abandonment considered to be appropriation as it was assuming owner’s rights.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

R v Vinall (2011)

A

Principle: Appropriation

Facts: D’s robbed a bike and abandoned it. The abandonment considered appropriation as it was assuming rights of an owner.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What case is an example of appropriation on the ground of selling?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Pitham and Hehl (1977)

Facts: D sold furniture that wasn’t his, therefore assuming the rights of an owner.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

R v Pitham and Hehl (1977)

A

Principle: Selling is appropriation

Facts: D sold furniture that wasn’t his, therefore assuming the rights of an owner.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

R v Morris (1983)

Facts

A

D switched price labels on products-considered appropriation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Case where D changed price labels on products?

A

R v Morris (1983)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What case is an example of appropriation with the V consent?

Give brief facts.

A

Lawrence v Commissioner for Met Police(1972)

Facts: D was a taxi driver who drove foreign student to a location and took more money than entitled to.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

What case is an example of appropriation of consent with deception?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Gomez (1993)

Facts. D paid for products with cheques which D knew to have no value.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

R v Gomez (1993)

A

Example of: appropriation with consent with deception.

Facts: D paid for products using checks he knew to be of no value.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

What case is an example of appropriation with consent WITHOUT deception?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Hinks (2000)

Facts: D persuaded V (I’d limited intelligence) to gift her money

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

R v Hinks (2000)

A

Example of: appropriation with consent WITHOUT deception.

Facts: D persuaded V (of limited intelligence) to ‘gift’ her money.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

What case is an example that intention must be formed at the point of appropriation?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Atakpu and Abrahams (1994)

Facts: D’s hires cars in Germany and Belgium and were arrested at Dover for theft. Conviction quashed as keeping and driving in England was not a new appropriation.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

R v Atakpu and Abraham’s (1994)

A

Principle: that intention must be formed when appropriation occurs.

Facts: D’s hire cars abroad and were arrested in Dover. Convictions of theft quashed as appropriation occurred outside of England.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

s4 Theft Act (1968) gives what 5 types of items which are included in the definition of property, what are they?

A

1) Money (coins and banknotes)
2) Real property
3) Personal property
4) Things in action
5) other intangible products

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

What case demonstrates that body parts can be considered property under the Theft Act 1968?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Kelly and Lindsay (1998)

Facts: Kelly (a sculptor) asked Lindsay to take body parts from the Royal College of Surgeons

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

R v Kelly and Lindsay (1998)

A

Example of: that body parts can be considered property.

Facts: Kelly (a sculptor) asked Lindsay to take body parts from the Royal College of Surgeons. D’s found guilty of theft

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

What is the definition of ‘real property’ under s4 Theft Act 1968?

A

Land and building

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

s4(1) Theft Act 1968

A

Land can be stolen

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

What act and section provides that ‘land can be stolen’?

A

s4(1) Theft Act 1968

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

What is ‘things in action’?

A

A right that can be enforced on another another person by an action in law.

36
Q

Give an example of a ‘thing in action’.

A

A cheque

37
Q

What is ‘other intangible property’?

A

Rights which have no physical presence like electricity.

38
Q

What case demonstrates that confidential information cannot be considered property?

A

Oxford v Moss (1979)

Facts: D acquired exam answers. Found not guilty as confidential information is not property.

39
Q

What sections for things which cannot be stolen?

A

s4(3)

s4(4)

40
Q

s4(3) Theft Act 1968

s4(4) Theft Act 1968

A

Things which cannot be stolen except in specific circumstances.

41
Q

What case demonstrates that someone can steal their own property?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Turner (1971)

Facts: D stole his car from a garage before paying for repairs.

42
Q

R v Turner (1971)

A

Demonstrates: that someone can steal their own property.

Facts: D took his own car back from a garage before he paid for the repairs.

43
Q

What case demonstrates that someone can be in possession and control of property even though they don’t know it is there?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Woodman (1974)

Facts: D took scrap metal from a site that the owner was in control of but didn’t know of the scrap metal presence.

44
Q

R v Woodman (1974)

A

Demonstrates: that someone can be in possession and control of property even if they don’t know it is there.

Facts: D took scrap metal from site.

45
Q

What case demonstrates the principle that foods left for someone, the goods belong to the original owner until collection by new owner.

A

Ricketts (2010)

Facts: D took bags containing items outside a charity shop-held that the bags belonged to the old owner until the charity shop collected them.

46
Q

Ricketts (2010)

A

Principle: that property left for someone, belongs to the owner until collection by the new owner.

Facts: D took bags outside a charity shop-held that the bags belongs to the original owner until collection by the charity shop.

47
Q

What case demonstrates the principle of ‘proprietary interest’?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Webster (2006)

Facts: D was in army. Awarded medal for service but mistakenly received 2 and sold the second on eBay. Held that MoD still had a proprietary interest in the medal.

48
Q

R v Webster (2006)

A

Principle: proprietary interest

Facts: D was in army. Received medal for service but was sent 2 and he sold the second on eBay. Held that MoD still had a proprietary interest in the medal.

49
Q

In what three occasions can a person be guilty of theft where the property does NOT ‘belong to another’?

A

1) trust property-where a trustee can steal it
2) property received under obligation
3) property received by another mistake

50
Q

What case demonstrates misusing property received under an obligation can be considered theft?

Give brief facts.

A

Klineberg and Marsden (1999)

Facts: D’s sold timeshares but did not deposit investor’s money into trust company-D’s guilty of theft.

51
Q

Klineberg and Marsden (1999)

A

Principle: that property misused when received under an obligation can be considered theft.

Facts: D’s sold timeshares but did not deposit investor’s funds into the trust. D’s charges with theft.

52
Q

What case demonstrates that even informal arrangements can constitute a clear obligation to deal with property in a certain way?

Give brief facts.

A

Davidge v Bunnet (1984)

Facts: D was given money to pay for gas but used it to buy Xmas presents. D guilty of theft.

53
Q

Davidge v Bunnet (1984)

A

Principle: informal arrangements can still constitute a clear obligation to deal with property in a particular way.

Facts: D was given money by flatmates to pay gas bill but bought presents instead. D charged with theft.

54
Q

What case is an example that ‘property received by mistake’ and kept can constitute theft?

Give brief facts.

A

AG ref no. 1 of 1983

Facts: D, a policewoman received an overpayment of wages. She did not return the money. D convicted of theft.

55
Q

AG ref no. 1 of 1983

A

Principle: that ‘property received by a mistake’ and kept can constitute theft.

Facts: D, a policewoman, was overpaid wages but did not return the extra amount. D convicted of theft.

56
Q

What case is an example of no legal obligations to restore money then no theft has occurred.

Give brief facts.

A

R v Gilks 1972

Facts: Bookmaker overpaid D his winnings but D did not return the extra. He was found NOT guilty of theft as betting transactions were not enforceable at that time.

57
Q

R v Gilks 1972

A

Principle: that in some situations there is no legal obligation to restore money.

Facts: Bookkeeper overpaid D his winnings and D did not return the extra. D was found NOT guilty of theft as betting transactions were not enforceable at the time.

58
Q

What section and act provides for ‘behaviour which is not dishonest’?

A

s2(1) Theft Act 1968

59
Q

s2(1) Theft Act 1968

A

Behaviour which is not dishonest regarding the mens rea of theft.

60
Q

What are the three behaviours which are not dishonest, regarding the mens rea of theft?

A

D believes that:

  • They have the right to it-s2(1)(a)
  • they would have the other’s consent s2(1)(b)
  • the person to whom property belongs cannot be found by any reasonable steps s2(1)(c)
61
Q

s2(1)(a) Theft Act 1968

A

D believed they had a right to the property

62
Q

D believed they had a right to the property.

A

s2(1)(a)

63
Q

s2(1)(b)

A

D believed they would have the other’s consent if the other knew of the appropriation and the circumstances

64
Q

D believed they would have the other’s consent.

A

s2(1)(b)

65
Q

s2(1)(c)

A

The person to whom the property belongs cannot be discovered by any reasonable means

66
Q

The person to whom the property belongs cannot be discovered by any reasonable means

A

s2(1)(c)

67
Q

What case demonstrates that even an unreasonable belief does not necessarily constitute dishonesty, regarding the mens rea of theft.

Give brief facts.

A

R v Small (1987)

Facts: D took a car that had been abandoned for two weeks. D found NOT guilty of theft.

68
Q

R v Small (1987)

A

Principle: that even an unreasonable belief does not necessarily constitute dishonesty, regarding the mens rea of theft.

Facts: D took a car that had been abandoned for 2 weeks. D found NOT guilty of theft.

69
Q

What 2 cases are examples that if D believes they have a right to the property they are not necessarily held to be dishonest?

A

R v Holden (1991)-Kwik fit employee takes tyres

R v Robinson (1977)-D is owed £7 takes back £5

70
Q

R v Holden (1991)

A

Principle: a person will not be considered dishonest where they believed they were entitled to deprive the other of it

Facts: D took scrap tyres from Kwik fit where he worked as others had done the same. D NOT charged with theft.

71
Q

R v Robinson (1977)

A

Principle: a person will not be considered dishonest where they believed they were entitled to deprive the other of it

Facts: D was owed £7 and took back £5 after a scuffle with the husband of the borrower

72
Q

What case established the test for dishonestly, regarding the mens rea of theft?

Give brief facts.

A

R v Ghosh (1982)

Facts: D was a doctor and claimed back funds for an op he didn’t conduct as they matched what he was owed for consultation fees.

73
Q

R v Ghosh (1982)

A

Principle: the Ghosh test

Facts: D was a doctor who claimed fees for an op he didn’t conduct as they were equal to fees he was owed for consultation.

74
Q

What are the two stages of the Ghosh test?

A

1) Was what was done dishonest according to the ordinary standards of reasonable people?
2) Did D realise what they were doing was dishonest by those standards?

75
Q

What case brings doubt on the second part of the Ghosh test?

A

Ivey v Genting Casinos (2017)

76
Q

Ivey v Genting Casinos (2017)

A

Gives doubt for the second part of the Ghosh test.

77
Q

What case demonstrates that the Ghosh test has some problems?

Give brief facts.

A

DPP v Gohill (2007)

Facts: D’s worked at equipment hire company and weren’t charging some customers for hiring tools. D’s did not make personal gain. D’s not guilty of theft.

78
Q

DPP v Gohill (2007)

A

Demonstrates: that there are some issues with the Ghosh test.

Facts: D’s worked at tool hire company and didn’t always charge customers. No gain was made by D’s. D’s not charged with theft.

79
Q

What case demonstrates that taking cash from a toll with the intention of replacing is still theft?

A

R v Velumyl (1989)

Facts: D took money from safe of employer with intention to replace. Classed as theft as he couldn’t possibly replace the banknotes themselves.

80
Q

R v Velumyl (1989)

A

Principle: that even if there is an intention to take cash and replace it in future, that is still classed as theft.

Facts: D took cash from safe with intention to replace. Classed as theft as D could not possibly replace the cash itself.

81
Q

What case demonstrates that the property doesn’t have to be disposed of by D but simply used as the genuine owner would for a conviction of theft?

A

DPP v Lavender (1994)

Facts: D took doors from a council property to put on his own council property.

82
Q

DPP v Lavender (1994)

A

Principle: that D doesn’t have to dispose of property to have intention to deprive the owner. Just use it as if they were the owner.

Facts: D swapped the doors on house council flat to his own council house.

83
Q

Which case demonstrates that borrowing or lending isn’t necessarily an offence?

A

R v Lloyd (1985)

Facts: D made illegal copy of a film that was to be shown in cinema. D found not guilty of theft as he intended to replace it.

84
Q

R v Lloyd (1985)

A

Principle: the difference between borrowing and taking is if the borrowing becomes to an extent that the property is useless to the original owner.

Facts: D made an illegal copy of a film from the cinema using the physical tape, but returned it later. D not guilty of theft.

85
Q

What case demonstrates that someone can temporarily take possession of property only to return it later and not be intending to deprive the other of it?

A

R v Easom (1971)

Facts: D took someone’s handbag, rummaged inside, then returned it as there was nothing worth stealing. D not guilty of theft.

86
Q

R v Easom (1971)

A

Principle: what if D examines property but the decides not to steal anything?

Facts: D took handbag but returned it after deciding there was nothing worth stealing.

Year 2 A-Level Law AQA Textbook (18 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions