Property offences: Theft and robbery Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

What is the definition of “Theft”?

A

Theft is defined in s1 Theft Act 1968 a person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it’

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

What is the order of the sections of theft?

A
  1. Act 2, dishonestly, MR.
  2. Act 3, appropriates, AR.
  3. Act 4, property, AR.
  4. Act 5, belonging to another, AR.
  5. Act 6, intention of permanently depriving the other of it, MR.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Actus Reus - Appropriation (s3)

A

The act of taking something or assuming one of the rights of the owner. It can involve physically picking up an item, destroying property, throwing items away, selling property, switching price labels, or giving worthless cheques in payment for goods.

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

R V Vinall (2011)

A

D took the bike of the V using verbal and physical threats. Appropriation is satisfied because the initial taking of the bike and the intention of abandoning the bike has satisfied the AR and MR of theft.

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

R V Pitman and Hehl (1977)

A

This shows appropriation by assuming the right to sell. The D offered furniture for sale not belonging to himself, only the owner has the right to sell.

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

R V Morris (1983)

A

The D was still charged with appropriation even though he had not left the supermarket. he had taken when he switched the labels.

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

Lawrence V CMP (1972)

A

An appropriation can still take place even though the owner has given permission, this is because the D used deception to get consent from the V.

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

R V Gomez (1993)

A

Paying for goods with counterfeit money when the person selling thinks it is real/good so they consent.

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

R V Hinks (2000)

A

The D used deception to withdraw £50k from the v and £300 every day, as the v had limited intelligence, he couldn’t apprehend what was happening. Money was given freely but deception was used, following Lawrence.

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

R V Atakpu and Abrahams (1994)

A

The corporation that happened was under the jurisdiction of a non-English legal system, so it didn’t satisfy all the elements of theft.

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

Can you assume the right of an owner at a later time?

A

You can assume the rights of the owner at a later time, your guilty of appropriation.

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

Actus reus - Property (s4)

A

“property” can be money, real property, personal property, things in action, or other intangible property.

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

R V Kelly and Lindsay (1998)

A

Body parts.

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

R V Herbert (1961)

A

Hair.

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

R V Rothery (1976)

A

Blood.

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

R V Welsh (1974)

A

Urine.

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

What is a “Thing in action”?

A

Covers (potentially non-tangible) things that you use with an agreement. Such as a bank account or a credit card.

18
Q

What is “other intangible property “?

A

Covers no physical presence but can be stolen for example electricity.

19
Q

Oxford V Moss (1979)

A

D, a university student, acquired proof of an exam paper he was due to sit. D had no intention of permanently depriving the university of the exam paper. He was charged with theft of confidential information, he wasn’t found guilty under the theft act.

20
Q

What is “Belonging to another”?

A

S. 5(1) Belonging to any person who has possessions or control of it, has a proprietary right or interest.

21
Q

Case: Turner No.2.

A

The garage had the right to possess the car until paid.

22
Q

Ricketts v Basildon Magistrate (2011).

A

Property left outside the door of a charity shop still belonged to the original owner until the charity shop took them in. This property hadn’t been abandoned.

23
Q

Case: Woodman (1974).

A

The owner still had a proprietary interest even though didn’t know metal was still there; they had secured the site to keep out trespassers. Even if the remaining scrap had been abandoned ownership still reverts to occupiers of the land.

24
Q

What does s. 5(3) say about property belonging to another if you use it for an unintended purpose.

A

Davidge v Benett (1984) - Money is given to pay the gas bill; used instead for Christmas presents. Held as used for unintended purpose.

25
Q

What does s. 5(4) say about proprietary interest?

A

Middleton (1873) - Where a person was paid by mistake, here by a post office clerk, a sum in excess of that properly payable, the person who accepted the overpayment with knowledge of the excess was guilty of theft.

26
Q

Case: Webster (2006) (Army)

A

A second medal was received by mistake. The army retained proprietary interest, D had no legal right to it so it should have been returned.

27
Q

What is the definition of Mens rea for theft?

A

“Dishonestly, and with the intention to permanently deprive the other of it.” NOTE - The mens rea must be present at the time of the Act (Actus reus) took place.

28
Q

What are the exception of dishonesty (s2)?

A

1) Believes has right in law to deprive the other of it.
Robinson (1977) - During a fight with her husband £5 dropped from husband pocket. D kept it. Conviction squashed; D honestly believed he had an honest right to the money.
2) Believes he would have the other consent.
3) Believes the owner cant be discovered with reasonable steps.
Small (1987) - There is no requirement that the D’s belief is reasonable so it was immaterial that a reasonable person would have to contact the DVLA to discover the owner of the “abandoned” car.

29
Q

How do we establish “dishonesty”?

A

Use the test from Ivey v Genting casinos (2017) (R V Barton and Booth.)
Ascertain D’s knowledge or belief of the facts - (what did D know?)
Knowing what D knew, were his actions dishonest by the objective standards of ordinary, decent people?

30
Q

Intention of permanently depriving the other of it.

A

S. 6(1) - Intention is to treat the thing as his own to dispose of; borrowing or lending … for a certain period and in circumstances making it equivalent.
Velumyl (1989) - Company director took money from the safe, he was planning to return it but ended up being caught, he was convicted because it isn’t the same bank notes. He intended to permanently deprive the company of the money.

31
Q

Case: DPP v J (2002)

A

Headphones returned broken so didn’t retain goodness, virtue and practical value - Intended to permanently deprive.

32
Q

Case: Lloyd (1985)

A

Film returned undamaged so there was no intent to permanently deprive.

33
Q

Case: Easom (1971)

A

D picked up a handbag to see if there was anything worth stealing, there wasnt, D wasnt convicted of theft because there was no intent to permantly deprive only conditional intent.

34
Q

State the s8 of the theft act (robbery).

A

“A person is guilty of robbery if he steals, and immediately before or at the time of doing so, and in order to do so, he uses force on any person or puts or seeks to put any person in fear of being then and there subjected to force.” Must have all the elements of theft for it to be a robbery.

35
Q

What are the 3 extra elements for robbery?

A

1) Using force or threat of force.
2) Immediately before or at the time of the theft.
3) use of force in order to steal.

36
Q

Case: Dawson and James (1976)

A

Normal meaning of forced used - for the jury to decide whether force was used.

37
Q

Case: Clouden (1987)

A

The force used on the bag was sufficient to amount to force on a person.

38
Q

Case: Hale (1978)

A

Appropriation of jewellery was a continuing act; it is up to the jury to decide whether the act has finished so force was deemed at the time of theft.

39
Q

Case: Lockley (1995)

A

The defendant had been caught shoplifting by a security guard. He used force on the security guard in order to escape. He was convicted of robbery and appealed. Held: Appeal dismissed. Hale was still good law and and appropriation is a continuing act. Force used in order to escape is thus treated as force used in order to steal and his conviction was upheld.

40
Q

Name on exception of robbery in order to steal?

A

If the force and the theft are unrelated, A pushed B over then sees his phone fall from his pocket then this is battery and theft.

41
Q

What is the contemporaneity rule?

A

All aspects of the theft act or the robbery must occur at the same time.