Theft and Related Offences

Question 1

Subjective approach to appropriation

Answer 1

Lawrence v MPC (1972)
Taxi driver “helps himself” to unfair sum out of student’s wallet; he had appropriated
Gomez (1992)
D said two cheques were valid when he know they were not and a rogue was supplied £16000 worth of goods; opted to follow Lawrence over Morris
Hinks (2000)
Friend of a victim with limited intelligence, guilty of appropriating even with permission

Question 2

Objective approach to appropriation

Answer 2

Morris (1984)

Switched price labels around, guilty of theft for assuming the rights of the owner

Question 3

Effects of Gomez and Hinks

Answer 3

(1) There an be appropriation, even where the victim consents, provided the consent is acquired by deception
(2) There can be appropriation without deception
(3) An overlap between theft and obtaining property by deception contrary to section 15
(4) The distinction between theft and cheating should be preserved and transparent, clear law

Question 4

A thing in action

Answer 4

AG Reference (No.1 of 1994)
Paid too much overtime and knew this, the debt was a thing in action so she was capable of stealing it

Question 5

Confidential information not property

Answer 5

Oxford v Moss (1978)

Acquired an exam paper for the exam, not theft. Section 13 could be considered if a computer.

Question 6

Property belongs to anyone with a right or control over it

Answer 6

Turner (No.2) (1971)

Can steal property that belongs to yourself, turner took back car from garage without permission

Question 7

You can steal from another partner of ownership

Answer 7

Bonner (1970)

Sold property belonging to both them and a partner without permission, this was theft

Question 8

Problems using section 5(3): property received under an obligation

Answer 8

Hall (1973)
Received money from clients as deposits for air-trips, but paid the money into the firm’s general account. None of the flight’s materialised. He was not placed under a deal with obligation to use the money in a particular way.
Lewis v Lethbridge (1987)
Didn’t pay charity after collecting money, there was no obligation to maintain the money collected or its proceeds. The relationship with the charity was simply one of debtor and creditor.
Wain (1995)
Raised money for a telephone competition. Lewis decision “very narrow” and did not apply.

Question 9

Can be convicted in appropriate circumstances where property has been obtained by mistake

Answer 9

Davis (1998)
Was paid his housing benefit in double; he knew of the mistake and was under an obligation to make a restoration
Gilks (1972)
There is no obligation to restore a gambling debt, but still guilty under section 5(1); seems bad law

Question 10

Subjective dishonesty test

Answer 10

Ghosh (1982)

(1) Was D’s conduct dishonest by the current standards of ordinary decent people?
(2) Did D know that his conduct was dishonest by the current standards of ordinary decent people?

Question 11

Robbery: appropriation is acting in a way which is inconsistent with the rights of the owner

Answer 11

Cocoran v Anderton (1980)

Trying to steal bag off of woman but she held onto it

Question 12

There must be some force in robbery

Answer 12

Clouden (1987)
Running up behind a woman and taking bag not force and there was no resistance; up to the jury to decide if there was force
DPP v RP (2013)
Snatching a cigarette with no bodily contact and not sufficient force to regard as robbery

Question 13

There doesn’t need to be fear for robbery

Answer 13

B and R v DPP (2007)

Left the tube station and surrounded by men, no fear but force was sufficient for robbery

Question 14

Entry for burglary must be effective and substantial

Answer 14

Collins (1973)
Question of fact for the jury; man entered house of woman and she mistakenly though it was her boyfriend and permitted entry
CA held that the D could only be guilty of entering as a trespasser if
(a) he entered knowing he was trespasser or
(b) he was reckless as to whether or not he was entering the premises of another without the other party’s consent (Cunningham)
Ryan (1996)
Sticking arm through window was effective entry

Question 15

A person who is given permission to enter a building for one purpose and enters for another will be a trespasser

Answer 15

Jones and Smith (1976)
“When you invite D into your house to use your staircase you do not invite him to slide down the banisters” per Scrutton LJ

Question 16

Portability does not prevent a structure from being a building

Answer 16

B and S v Leathley (1979)

Unusual/controversial decision that a freezer may constitute a building

Question 17

Must enter a part of the building which bulgrary is inteded with some physical demarcation deeming it a different area

Answer 17

Walkington (1979)
Behind the counter in a department store is a part. The test is whether:
(1) the management had impliedly prohibited customers from entering that area; and
(2) D knew of that prohibition.

Question 18

Conditional intent is sufficient

Answer 18

AG Reference (Nos 1 and 2 of 1979)
The defendant entered a house as a trespasser with the intention to steal money, but was conditional on whether or not he found money