Theft Act 1968 Flashcards
Section 3.1 sets out appropriation
Taking something for your own use without permission
Section 1 of theft act 1968
A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriate property belonging to someone else with the intention to permanently deprive
Swapping around labels (Case of Morris 1968)
Defendant swapped around labels with the intention to pay less for an item , he was found guilty of appropriating someone else’s item)
Even without stealing an item you can be held liable for theft
Corcoran v anderton
Defendant touched the women’s bag in order to steal it but the bag dropped when he ran
Even without possessing the item it’s can still be appropriation pitham and hehl
Owner of the property was in prison the defendant sold the item to to pitham who knew the defendant didn’t have owner ship
Banks and checques in theft act 1968
A credit in someone’s bank account is properly
When someone’s requests funds via cheque using someone else’s cheque this is theft because the intention is to permanent deprive
An example of requesting funds is the governer of Pentonville prison
The defendant sent a telex requesting funds which appropriation assumed the rights of the owner
What is retaining wrongful credit of theft act 1968??
Retaining any credit that was wrongfully credited into your account
In England r v Ngan 1998 sets out the law for people falsely cashing in cheque
Ngan handed in Cheques in England which were not hers and was found guilty of appropriation
R v Velumyl 1989 is a case where if you intend to….
Pay the exact money back your not guilty of theft
Even with consent appropriation can happen for example Lawrence v MPC
An Italian man came to the UK with little English he ordered a taxi and arrived at the destination the driver when he seen the wallet open took a further £6 which was appropriation
DPP v Gomez is another case where even with consent. Appropriation can happen
In DPP v Gomez the defendant and his friend tricked the manager to process £17k worth of funds / items
They paid in fake cheques the manager authorised the items
Gifts with consent
In Hinks 2001 , the defendant befriended a vulnerable John Dolphin , the defendant influenced over 7 months to hand 60k under “gifts”
Land law
Section 4.2 a trustee selling a land isn’t his has commited theft
Section 4.2B D who is not possession of land that digs or lets cattle graze on it has commited theft
Stealing electricity isn’t theft but what other natural sources is theft
Water and gas
Low v blease is the case where the defendant abstracted electricity without authority
