Theft

Question 1

Morris (1983)

Answer 1

The defendant assumed the rights of the owner when he put a rice label on the goods so there had been appropriation

Question 2

Lawrence (1971)

Answer 2

The HofL held there had been appropriation as the consent to the exact amount that should have been taken and not any more money

Question 3

Hinks (2000)

Answer 3

The HofL held there had been appropriation even though the victim consented, as they had only consented through deception

Question 4

Atakpu and Abrahams (1994)

Answer 4

Appropriation occurs at one point in time. The theft occurred in Germany and Belgium, keeping, and driving them in the UK was not an appropriation

Question 5

Kelly and Lindsay (1998)

Answer 5

Body parts are not usually property that can be stolen. However, they are property if they are being used for medical science

Question 6

Oxford v Moss (1979)

Answer 6

The D was not guilty as the information is no property that can be stolen

Question 7

Turner (No2)(1971)

Answer 7

The D was guilty of stealing his own car as it was in possession and control of the garage.

Question 8

Ricketts v Basildon Magistrates’ Court (2010)

Answer 8

The court ruled the bags had not been abandoned and the delivery of the items would be complete when the charity shop was in possession

Question 9

Webster (2006)

Answer 9

Even thought the D had possession of the medal, it belonged to another as the military of defence had a proprietary interest

Question 10

Davidge v Bunnett (1984)

Answer 10

There was a legal obligation to deal with the money in a particular way and as she had not, she was guilty of theft

Question 11

Attorney-General’s Reference (No1 of 1983)(1985)

Answer 11

There was an obligation to restore the money to the employer and the D was guilty of theft when she gained the dishonest intent not to pay the money back

Question 12

Ivey v Genting Casinos (2017)

Answer 12

The supreme court re-defined dishonesty test as the previous test was “no longer good law”

Question 13

R v Barton and Booth (2020)

Answer 13

The court confirmed the two-part test for dishonesty is:
1.What was the D’s state of knowledge or belief as to the facts
2. And was his conduct reasonable by the standards of the ordinary decent person

Question 14

Velumyl (1989)

Answer 14

The CofA upheld the Ds theft conviction as he intended to permanently deprive the company of the exact same bank notes taken