Theft structure Flashcards
Identify and define Theft?
S1(1) of the theft act 1968 states ‘a person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention to permanently deprive the other’
5 elements must be proved for there to have been a theft
Three key elements of theft - Actus reus?
S3(1) Appropriation
S4(1) Property
S5(1) Belongs to another
Two key elements of theft - Mens rea?
S2(1) Dishonestly
S6(1) Intention to permanently deprive
Actus reus components?
Define Appropriation and state relevant cases - (then apply)
Appropriation, defined in S3(1) theft act 1968 as ‘any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner amounts to an appropriation’
R v Morris - changed pricing label
R v Vinall - Robbery case
R v Pitham and Hehl - assumed rights of property to sell
What if V consents to the taking of their property? cases?
May still be an appropriation
Lawrence v MPC - Even if V consents I can be appropriation - not genuine consent/based on true situation
R v Gomez - convinced manager to accept 2 fake cheques
R v Hinks - Gift - even accepting a valid gift can sometimes amount to appropriation especially if the donor is vulnerable in some way.
S3(1) also says what can amount to appropriation?
Where D acquires the property innocently (w/o stealing) but then later decides to keep it/deal with it as the owner.
Define Property and state relevant cases - (then apply)
Property, defined in S4(1) of the theft act 1968 states ‘Property includes money and all other property real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property’
Intangible - Oxford v Moss - information
R v Kelly and Lindsay - dead bodies and body parts not normally property exception - can be personal property with meaning - eg teaching etc
(R v Welsh - urine. R v Herbert - hair. R v Rothery - blood. certain circumstances)
What does s4(2) state?
Land can be stolen but only in three particular circumstances ;
- Someone who severs anything considered part of the land from the land
- A tenant takes a fixture or structure from the land let to him
- Someone legally entrusted to look after the land abuses the power
Define Belonging to another and state relevant cases - (then apply)
Belonging to another, defined in S5(1) of the theft act 1968 states ‘having possession or control of the property or any proprietary interest in it is sufficient’
Cases for Possession or control?
R v Turner - convicted stole his own car
R v Woodman - Owner does not have to know they have possession for it to be stolen
Ricketts v Basildon Magistrates - took bags from outside a charity shop - not abandoned still belonged to giver
Cases for Proprietary interest?
R v Webster - military man sold a copy of his medal - whoever gave it to him had proprietary interest
What does S5(3) say?
If D receives property under legal obligation to use it in a particular way, that property is still treated as belonging to the giver’
Davidge v Burnett - D was given money to use for a gas bill but used it on Christmas presents instead
What does S5(4) say?
If D receives property by mistake and is under legal obligation to return it, that means it will still be treated as belonging to the party who made the mistake
Att Gen Ref (No1 1983) - D was under obligation to make restoration - theft depended on whether D was dishonest or not.
Now the elements of Mens Rea
Define Dishonestly S2(1) and state relevant cases - (then apply)
Dishonestly, defined in S2(1) of the theft act 1968 states ‘a person is not dishonest if he or she appropriates property in belief that; he/she has the right to deprive the other of it (S2(1)(a)), he/she would have consent of the other if they knew about the appropriation or the circumstances (S2(1)(b)) or the person to whom the property belongs cannot be discovered by taking the reasonable steps (S2(1)(c)).
S2(1)(a) case?
R v Robinson - D threatened V for money they believed was owed and took £5 that they dropped - they were not dishonest.
S2(1)(b) case?
R v Holden - D took tyres from former employer - believed it would have been consented
S(2)(1)(c)
R v Small - D took a car he believed to have been abandoned with the keys in the ignition.
What does S2(2) say about dishonesty and what is the test used?
S2(2) expands on the meaning of dishonesty. It states that ‘a person’s appropriation of property belonging to another may be dishonest notwithstanding that he is willing to pay for the property’
Previously Ghosh set out the two-part test for dishonesty; Was what was done dishonest according to the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people? Did the defendant realise that what they were doing was dishonest by those standards? Now the test is set out by Ivey, removing the second part of the test.
Define Intention to permanently deprive S6(1) and state relevant cases - (then apply)
Intention to permanently deprive, defined in S6(1) as ‘intending to treat the property as ones own to dispose of (ie deal with) regardless of owners rights.’
Dpp v Lavender - by moving the doors from one flat to his, D was treating them as his own.
What does S6(1) say about borrowing and lending?
Borrowing can amount to an intent to permanently deprive if property is kept for such a time and in such circumstances, that it makes it equivalent to outright taking/disposable.
R v Lloyd - didn’t deprive the goodness, value or virtue if the property - therefore not permanent deprivation
R v Velumyl - took money with intention to replace it with same value - is deprivation
What is conditional intent?
Where D’s intention to permanently deprive is based upon the condition that V has worth stealing?
R v Easom - not guilty - left bag - no evidence
