Theft (s2 Dishonestly) Flashcards
Three exceptions where it isn’t dishonest
1) has in law the right to deprive the other of it
2) he would have the others consent if the other knew
3) the person to whom the property belongs cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps
- Robinson 1977- d was owed £7 by V’s wife. D approached v and threatened him. During the struggle v dropped a £5 note. D was charged with robbery but conviction was quashed because he genuinely believed that he was entitled to the mommy and was therefore not dishonest.
Willing to pay
D takes property and may say he is willing to pay or leaves money to pay for the property.
D may still be dishonest and therefor liable for theft.
This prevents the d from taking what he likes regardless of the owners wishes.
A sees a painting he likes in B’s house. B says it’s worth £500. A takes the painting and leaves £500 without taking to B. A is still liable
Gosh test 1982 - freely 1973
D was a manager at a bookmakers. The company notified all employees including D that borrowing from the till had to stop. D still borrowed £30. He was actually owed £60 by the company anyway. Convicted as felt still dishonest but quashed on appeal which caused lots of confusion
Gosh test - C of A set out dishonest
Locum doctor claiming fees for operations he hadn’t carried out. He said he wasn’t dishonest as he was owed money anyway for consultation fees. C of A set out an objective and subjective element
What is the objective element of the gosh test
Was the action dishonest according to the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people
What is the subjective test under the gosh test
Did the D realise that what he was doing was dishonest by those standards
Intention of permanently depriving
Velumyl (1989)
Velumyl 1989- company manager took over £1,000 from the safe. He said he was owed money from a friend and was then going to replace the money in the safe. CA upheld conviction as he had the intention to permanently deprive the company of bank notes, which he had taken from the safe, even if he had the intention of replacing them with other notes (of the same value) later.
With the intention of permanently depriving
If defendant destroys property, this is also the intention to permanently deprive. This is classed as theft and criminal damage.
DPP v Lavender (1994) - defendant took doors from a council property and used them to replace doors in his girlfriend’s council flat. The doors were still in position by the council, but had been transferred without permission from one council property to another. Held that by transferring the doors, he was treating them as his own regardless of the rights of the owner.
