Theft Flashcards
What elements (actus reus and mens rea) are required to be guilty of theft
ACTUS REUS
appropriation
of property
belonging to another
MENS REA
dishonesty
intention to permanently deprive
How is theft defined - act, section, definition
Section 1 Theft Act - “A person is guilty of theft if they dishonestly appropriate property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it”
Appropriation - act, section, definition
Section 3 Theft Act - “Any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner”
What is included in appropriation?
Taking something and keeping it
Selling
Destroying and damaging it
Modifying or changing it
Lending it to someone else
Appropriation case and also the case which states you don’t need to touch anything to appropriate it
McPherson
What does the case of A____ and A____ tell us about appropriation
Appropriation can be a continuing act but the jury decides when it stops
Atakpu and Abrahams
What does the case of R v M___ tell us about appropriation
Swapping labels in a store is appropriation
R v Morris
What does the case of N___ tell us about appropriation
If there is no appropriation there is no theft – even if there is intention to steal
Niman
What does s.3 Theft Act tell us about appropriation
Someone who purchases stolen items without knowledge is not guilty, even if they find out the items were stolen at a later date - R v Adams
What does the case of G____ tell us about appropriation
If the owner consents to the appropriation this will not be theft – UNLESS this consent is obtained by deception
Gomez
What does the case of L__tell us about appropriation
Theft can be found even where the victim consented to the appropriation
Lawrence
What does the case of H____ tell us about appropriation
There can be appropriation even if something is given as a gift – if there is deception
Hinks
How is property defined in Section 4 Theft Act
“Includes money and all other property, real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property”
What is included in property
- Money
- Personal property - phone, bag etc.
- Real property - Buildings
- Things in action - money in a bank account
Intangible property - things that cannot be seen but can class as property
Bodily fluids - R v Welsh
Cases for things in action
R v Kohn - cheques
Darroux v X - overtime
Things that are not classed as property
Corpse - R v Sharpe
Confidential Information - Oxford v Moss
Electricity - Low v Blease
Things that are not classed as property unless something happens to them
Wildflowers - Unless they are resold for profit - section 4(3) Theft Act
Wild animals - unless they are pets/possessions - Section 4(4) Theft Act
Body Parts - Unless skill is being applied to them - R v Kelly and Lindsay
Belonging to another - section with definition
Section 5 Theft Act 1968
Property shall be regarded as belonging to any person having possession or control of it, or having in it any proprietary right or interest
Things that are included in ‘belonging to another’
- Another person owning something
- Another person having possession or control of something
- Wide interpretation of ‘belonging to’ - includes stealing your own property in some situations (R v Turner) - car at garage
- Obtaining another persons property by mistake and keeping it (s.5(4)) (AG’s Ref) - extra wages
Being given another persons property for a specific reason and using it for something else (under an obligation - s.5(3) (Davidge v Bunnett) - gas bill, christmas presents
Includes if someone else has a ‘proprietary interest’ over the property. Explain what this means and include a case.
S.5(2) states that property held in trust belongs to anyone who has the right to enforce the trust, and an intention to defeat the trust is an attempt to deprive the person of that property
R v Marshall
D resold partly used underground tickets
Due to the case of Ivey v Genting, what does the jury have to ask when considering dishonesty?
What was the state of D’s knowledge or belief as to the facts?
Were their actions dishonest by the standards of ordinary decent people?
However, section 2 does state what will NOT be classed as dishonest:
D has the right to deprive the owner of the property (R v Dobinson 1977)
D would have consent of the owner in the circumstances (R v Holden 1991)
Person who the property belongs to cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps (R v Small 1988)
Dishonesty is left to the jury to decide - case
R v Feely
Intention to permanently deprive - section and definition
Includes “treating the thing as his own to dispose of regardless of the other’s rights”
Also includes borrowing and returning it in a less valuable way
Two cases for ITPD
R v Lavender - council doors - moved from building to house - guilty
R v Lloyd - borrowed films from cinema, returned them in time and undamaged - not guilty
What does the case of R v Easom tell us - ITPD
ITPD does not include condition intent (only would steal something valuable)
What does the case of R v Raphael tell us - ITPD
ITPD does include using their property for ransom
What does the case of R v Velumyl tell us - ITPD
ITPD includes intention to replace something with identical property.
What does the case of R v Fernandes tell us - ITPD
ITPD includes intending to return property but cannot be sure of its return
What does the case of R v Mitchell tell us about ITPD
ITPD does not include just abandoning property.
