Theft

• What is the definition of theft according to s1(1) Theft Act 1968?


  A person is guilty of theft if they dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.
• What are the elements that show the Actus Reus (AR) and Mens Rea (MR) in theft?


  The elements include dishonesty, appropriation, property, belonging to another, and intention to permanently deprive.
• What does s3 of the Theft Act 1968 define as appropriation?


  Appropriation is assuming the rights of an owner.
• What actions can amount to appropriation under s3(1) Theft Act 1968?


  Actions include using property, altering property, damaging or destroying it, selling it, giving it away, disposing of it temporarily, or abandoning it.
• How can appropriation occur even if the property was obtained innocently?


  Appropriation can occur if someone borrows an item but later assumes a right to it by keeping it.
• What was the significance of the case R v Morris regarding appropriation?


  The case established that mere touching may be appropriation.
• What did Lord Roskill state about appropriation in R v Morris?


  He stated that appropriation occurs when there is an adverse interference with or usurpation of the rights of an owner.
• What was the outcome of the case Lawrence v MPC regarding consent and appropriation?


  The courts ruled that appropriation may still be present even if the owner consents.
• How did the case Gomez [1993] confirm the ruling in Lawrence?


  It confirmed that appropriation can occur even when consent is given.
• What was the ruling in Hinks [2000] regarding gifts and appropriation?


  The ruling stated that valid gifts can technically be stolen, but the dishonesty aspect may not always be satisfied.
• What types of property are included under s4(1) Theft Act 1968?


  Property includes money, real property, personal property, things in action, and intangible property.
• What did the case Oxford v Moss [1978] establish about confidential information?


  The case established that confidential information is not considered property and cannot be stolen.
• What does s4(1) Theft Act 1968 say about prohibited drugs?


  Prohibited drugs are included as property under the Theft Act.
• What does R v Kelly [1998] say about property?


  It states that property includes parts and products of the body.
• What does R v Sharpe (1857) say about corpses?


  It states that property does not include a corpse unless it is embalmed.
• What does s4(3) and s4(4) of the Theft Act 1968 say about wild mushrooms and creatures?


  It states that picking wild mushrooms or flowers does not constitute theft unless done for reward or commercial purposes.
• What does s5(1) Theft Act 1968 define regarding property belonging to another?


  Property belongs to any person having possession or control of it, or having any proprietary right or interest.
• What did R v Turner (1970) illustrate about possession and control?


  The case illustrated that possession or control of property can belong to someone other than the owner at the time of appropriation.
• What was the ruling in Davidge v Bennett [1984] regarding the purpose of possession?


  The ruling stated that D was liable for theft as the cheques had been given with a clear obligation to apply the money for payment of the gas bill.
• What happens if property is obtained by mistake according to s5(1) Theft Act 1968?


  The person is under a legal obligation to restore the property to the victim.
• What was the outcome of R v Shadrokh-Cigari [1988] regarding mistakenly credited funds?


  D was guilty as the money belonged to another, despite being credited by mistake.
• What are the three situations where D is NOT regarded as dishonest according to s2(1) Theft Act 1968?


  If D believes they have the legal right to deprive the other, if D believes they have the other’s consent, or if D believes the owner cannot be discovered.
• What is the Ghosh Test and how has it changed?


  The Ghosh Test was replaced by the Ivey Test, which assesses the defendant's knowledge and whether their conduct is dishonest by ordinary standards.
• What does the case R v Velumyl (1989) illustrate about intention to permanently deprive?


  The case illustrates that intending to replace stolen property does not negate the intention to permanently deprive.
• What did Lloyd (1985) state about borrowing property?


  Borrowing could fall within intention to permanently deprive if the property is borrowed until its value is diminished.
• What are the elements of the offence of theft (AR/MR)?


  • Dishonesty
  • Appropriation
  • Property
  • Belonging to another
  • Intention to permanently deprive
• What are the sections and cases relevant to theft?

  • s1(1) Theft Act 1968: Definition of theft
  • s3 Theft Act 1968: Appropriation
  • s4 Theft Act 1968: Property
  • s5 Theft Act 1968: Belonging to another
  • s2 Theft Act 1968: Dishonesty
  • s6 Theft Act 1968: Intention to permanently deprive
  • Key cases: R v Morris, Lawrence v MPC, Gomez, Hinks, Oxford v Moss, R v Turner, Davidge v Bennett, R v Shadrokh-Cigari, R v Velumyl, Lloyd