Theft

Question 1

Appropriation (S.3(1) theft act 1968)

Answer 1

• Definition - Any assumption of the rights of an owner (S.3(1) theft act 1968).
• No need to take possession of the property for an appropriation (Pitham & Hehl).
• Even temporary possession can be appropriation (Cocoran & Anderson).
• Appropriation does not need to be all of the rights, assumption of any of the rights is enough (Morris).
• where consent is obtained through fraud there can still be appropriation (Lawrence/Gomez).
• there can still be appropriation where the owners consent is obtained without fraud (Hinks).
• later assumption of a right is appropriation when the person decided to keep the property or deal with the property as his own (s.3(1) theft act 1968).

Question 2

Property (S.4(1) theft act 1968)

Answer 2

• 5 types of property (S.4(1): money, personal property (all moveable items (Kelly & Lindsay)); real property (land & buildings, something which can be removed from land (S.4(2)(b), tenants that steal fixtures or structures (S.4(2)(c)); things in action (a right in law against another person which can be enforced, e.g. cheques & bank acccounts); other intangible property (things with no physical presence e.g. patents (Oxford v Moss)).
• can’t steal wild plants, foliage, fruits, or fungi unless you sell what you pick (S.4(3)).
• can’t steal wild animals unless they have been reduced into possession (S.4(4)).

Question 3

Belonging to another (S.5(1) theft act 1968)

Answer 3

• property belongs to another if they have possession, or control, or a proprietary right/ interest in it (S.5(1)).
• possession - you can be guilty of stealing your own property if it is in someone else’s possession (Turner no.2).
• control - you can be in control of property even if you don’t know it’s there (Woodman).
• proprietary right (Marshall).
• abandoned property does not belong to another, property is abandoned if you intend to give up your proprietary rights (Williams v Phillips/Hibbert v Mckiernan).
• special situations under the theft act - appropriating the property will be theft even though D may have possession, control, and ownership: property received under an obligation (given to another person to be used in a particular way (S.5(3))/Davidge v Bunnet Hall); property received by mistake (S.5(4))/AG Ref no.1 1983).
• property has to belong to another person at the time of the appropriation (Kaur Dip v CC of Hants).

Question 4

Dishonesty

Answer 4

• theft act 1968 gives 3 situations where a person will not be dishonest, based on D’s honest, not reasonable, belief (Holden): belief to a right in law to the property (S.2(1)(a))/Robinson); belief in the owners consent (S.2(1)(b)); belief in the fact that the owner cannot be found (S.2(1)(c)).
• there is no test for dishonest in the theft act 1968, this comes from case law: Ivey test (Ivey v Genting Casinos) given the facts as D knew them to be at the time of the offence, was D dishonest by the standard of ordinary decent people? The Ivey test is now to be used in criminal cases too (Barton 2020).

Question 5

Intention to Permanently Deprive (S.6(1) theft act 1968)

Answer 5

• ITPD someone of their property occurs when they treat the property as their own to dispose of regardless of the owner’s rights (S.6(1)).
• what does dispose of mean? Early cases held it should have a dictionary meaning (Cahill); later cases held it should be wider, to include dealing with the property (Lavender); abandoning car not ITPD (Mitchell); abandoning bike is ITPD (Vinall).
• when does borrowing amount to treating property as your own to dispose of regardless of owner’s rights? When the goodness, virtue, and practical value has gone out of the article (Lloyd); if you borrow ,knew you may be under obligation to return actual notes taken (Velumyl); if you take property and offer to return for money is an ITPD (Raphael).
• it is not ITPD if you pick up property to see if there is anything worth stealing (Edsom)