Theft

Question 1

R v Morris 1983

Answer 1

Facts-Both people convicted for switching labels at a store and buying products for cheaper prices.
Ratio-There was appropriation of all the rights of the owner.
Area-Appropriation.

Question 2

Lawrence v MPC 1972

Answer 2

Facts-The passenger of a taxi driver paid more than he needed to, but the driver kept the change and didn’t return it.
Ratio-Appriopriation can take place notwithstanding the consent of the owner.
Area-Appropriation

Question 3

DDP v Gomez 1993

Answer 3

Facts-Bought items from a shop with 2 stolen cheques.
Ratio-Assumption of any rights to the owner.
Area- Appropriation

Question 4

R v Hinks 2000

Answer 4

Facts-H persuaded D to make money transfers to her from his bank account which she then claimed were gifts.
Ratio-Appropriation exists even where the victim consents to the appropriation.
Area-Appropriation.

Question 5

Kelly and Lindsay 1998

Answer 5

Facts- K asked L to remove a number of human body parts from the college she worked at and they were later buried near k’s home.
Ratio-Parts of a corpse are capable of being property within s4 of the theft act.
Area-Personal property.

Question 6

Oxford v moss 1979

Answer 6

Facts- D took an exam paper with the intention of returning it with using information gained elsewhere(cheating).
Ratio-The confidential information contained in the paper did not amount to intangible property.
Area-Things in action, Intangible property.

Question 7

R v Turner (no2) 1971

Answer 7

Facts-Took car for repairs. When it was done he took the car without paying.
Ratio-Theft with section 1 of the theft act 1968
Area-Belonging to another .

Question 8

Webster 2006

Answer 8

Facts-D received a second medal from the ministry of defence, which he later sold on eBay.
Ratio-If the property was received there is no obligation to deal with the property.

Question 9

Hall 1972

Answer 9

Facts-Travel agent received money, which he put into business accounts. The business collapsed before the money have been used to book the holidays.
Ratio-No obligation to deal with the money in a particular way under a.5(3) theft act 1968.
Area-Belonging to another.

Question 10

Kleinberg and marsden 1999

Answer 10

Facts- D had over £500,000 paid to him but only £233 was paid into the independent account.
Ratio-‘Retain and deal with that property or it’s proceeds in a particular way.’
Area- Property received under an obligation.

Question 11

Davidge v bunnett 1984

Answer 11

Facts- D received cheques to pay for gas bills but instead bought Christmas presents.
Ratio-The cheques had been given under obligation to pay for the gas bills.
Area-belonging to another

Question 12

Gilks 1972

Answer 12

Facts- D placed a bet. Horse with a similar name won and D was mistakenly given over £100.
Ratio-The property never passed the appellant and therefore the property belonged to another.
Area-Belonging to another.

Question 13

Ghosh 1982

Answer 13

Facts-D was a surgeon who claimed money in respect of operations he had not done.
Ratio-Test for determining dishonesty.
Area-Dishonesty.

Question 14

Ivey v Genting casinos 2017

Answer 14

Facts-Casino did not pay the 7.7M he had won as the believed he was cheating. Ivey sued the casino.
Ratio-D must have recognised that ordinary honest people would see his actions as dishonest.
Area-Dishonesty.

Question 15

Velumyl 1989

Answer 15

Facts-Took money from a businesses safe, claiming he would return it a week after.
Ratio-Intention to permanently deprive the company of its money unless he returned it.
Area-property.

Question 16

Lloyd 1986

Answer 16

Facts-D took films from cinema, which is where he worked and got other people to copy them before he returned them.
Ratio-Borrowing and lending wording of s6(1), conviction squashed.
Area-Intention to permanently deprive.