theft cases Flashcards
appropriation core case
morris
morris
held ds conviction was upheld as hol’s stated that that there does not have to be ban an assumption of all the rights
consent
lawrence
lawrence
d argued the student had consented to giving the £6 but boath the coa and the hoL rejected this saying there had still been an appropiation the consent was irrelevant
property
oxford and moss
oxford and moss
knowledge of the questions on an exam paper was held not to be property
belonging to another core case
turner
turner
the car was in possesion and control of the garage so it was property belonging to another therefore D was guilty of stealing his own car
property recieved under an obligation
davidge v bunnett
davidge v bunnett
as the money had been given for a specfic purpose he had a legal obligation to deal with it in that way so it was property belonging to another
under the sale of goods where extar change is given
gilks
under contract extra money given
attorney general refrence
where was dishonesty outlined
ivey v genting casinos
where was dishonesty confirmed
bartoon and booth
mens rea core case
ivey v genting casinos
ivey v genting casinos
the UKSC upheld his conviction they said the test for dishonest should be whether the reasonable man would regard D’S actions as dishonest objective
money
velumyl
velumyl
the court of appeal upheld conviction for theft as he had the intention of permenantly depriving the company of the exact banknotes and coins
borrowed property
Lloyd
Lloyd
he is lacked intent to deprive as the film had not wholly diminished in value the fil could still be shown to the public
conditional intent
easom
easom
his conviction was quashed as there was no evidence he ITPD the owner of the bag or the contents within it
