theft Flashcards
act
s1 theft act
def
a person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention to permanetly deprive
Ar
appropriation
property
belonging to another
mr
dishonestly
intent permanently deprive
appropriation
s 3(1)
Any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner amounts to an appropriation, and this includes, where he has come by the property (innocently or not) without stealing it, any later assumption of a right to it by keeping or dealing with it as owner.
if the d has done something with the property which only the owner has the right to do then he has appropriated
lawrence
taxi driver takes more money
can occur when owner has consented
morris
switched labels
An assumption of ANY of the rights of the owner was sufficient
for an appropriation to occur the D had to act outside the implied consent of the owner or do some overt act that was inconsistent with the owner’s rights.
darroux
It was alleged that she had submitted inflated claims for overtime and claims for payment in lieu of holiday taken
She appealed against her conviction for theft, arguing that she had not appropriated the property as she had had no control over the bank account.
Her conviction for theft was quashed on the basis that the prosecution could not show appropriation. She had had no control over the bank account and therefore had not assumed any of the owner’s rights. The court further held that she should properly have been charged with fraud;
gomez
leading authority
The description of appropriation in Morris was tantamount to a ‘misappropriation’, introducing into the word the mental state of both owner and accused. I regard the word ‘appropriation’ in isolation as being an objective description of the act done irrespective of the mental state of either the owner or the accused
Dissenting: Lord Lowry said that the natural meaning of ‘appropriation’ was to take for oneself or to treat as one’s own, especially without authority
hinks
Gomez therefore gives effect to section 3(1) of the Act by treating “appropriation” as a neutral word comprehending “any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner”. If the law is as held in Gomez, it destroys the argument advanced on the present appeal, namely that an indefeasible gift of property cannot amount to an appropriation.
can appropriate a valid gift
property
s4 (1)
Property includes money and all other property, real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property.
real property - buildings, land
personal property - tangiable property
oxford v moss
couldnt steal test asnwers
low v blease
electricity couldnt be appropriated
clinton v cahill
heat could not be appropriated
kelly and lindsy
dead body parts
law there is no property in a corpse and therefore strictly speaking it cannot be stolen. However body parts …
…parts of a corpse are capable of being property
mistake
When property has been acquired by mistake, the courts will sometimes decide whether or not D has stolen property belonging to another according to the transfer of proprietary rights under civil law
belonging to another
s 5(1)
Property shall be regarded as belonging to any person having possession or control of it, or having in it any proprietary right or interest, whether it be a right of ownership, possession or equitable right
turner
– took back the car from the garage before paying. The owner of property can be convicted of its theft if someone else has possession or control of it at the time