Theft Flashcards
Location
S1 Theft Act 1968
Definition
dishonest appropriation of property belonging to another with the intention to permanently deprive the other of it
Actus Reus
- Appropriation (assume the rights of the owner)
- Property ( an item, money etc)
- Belonging to another
Mens Rea
- Dishonesty (GHOSH: mag/jury to decide if they believe D acted dishonestly)
3 examples that are not dishonest = believed had legal right to it, believed owner would consent, took reasonable steps to find owner - Intention to permanently deprive = must show D did not intend to return it or has used the full value of a ticket etc
Appropriation meaning
an act which assumes at least one of the owner’s rights e.g. selling, lending, using and consuming
R v Morris (Appropriation)
the owner’s right to put a price label was a right that had been assumed
R v Pitham and Hehl
d sold furniture belonging to another person, even if the owner was never deprived of the property, d had still appropriated it by assuming the rights of the owner to offer the furniture for sale
Property which can be taken during theft
- money
- personal belongings
- real property
- things in action
- other intangible property
Belonging to another definition
property belongs to someone when he is in possession or control of it or has any proprietary rights or interests in it
does not have to be lawful
Can you be guilty of stealing your own property?
Turner
yes
d left his car in a garage for repairs which he would pay for when he came to collect the car. he used his spare key to collect the car at night to avoid paying for repairs.
Webster (Belonging to another)
d received a second medal from the ministry of defence which he later sold on ebay, convicted of theft, if property was received, there can still be theft if there is an obligation to deal with the property in a particular way.
Attorney - General’s Reference (Belonging to another)
d, a police women, received an overpayment of wages, did not withdraw, but didn’t return it = she was convicted of theft of the property as she was was under an obligation to make restoration
Test if someone has been dishonest
Ghosh (1982)
d was a doctor acting as a locum consultant in a hospital, he claimed fees for an operation he had not carried out, said that he was not dishonest as he was owed the same amount for consultation fees
Test for dishonesty; objective and subjective element
- Was what was done dishonest according to ordinary standards of reasonable + honest people?
- Did the d realise that what he was doing was dishonest by those standards?
Why might Ghosh test cause problems for juries?
even mag and judges cannot agree on what is dishonest, so it is even more likely that juries will have very different views, can be subjective, juror’s personal bias = inconsistent decision making
Intention to permanently deprive
having the intention to take someone’s property and keep it for good without any intention of returning it
R v velumyl (1989)
d took £1050 from the office safe, said that he was owed money by a friend and he was going to replace the money = coa upheld conviction for theft as he had the intention of permanently depriving the company of the notes he had taken, even if he intended replacing them with other banknotes to the same value later
R v Loyd (1985)
d borrowed a film from a local cinema to make illegal copies, conviction = quashed = by returning the film in its original state, not possible to prove an intention to permantly deprive
R v Easom (1971)
d picked up a handbag, ramaged through the contents, then replaced handbag without taking anything, conviction of theft = quashed = no evidence that they had intended to permanently deprive the owner
