Subdecks (1)

    Cards (58)

    • What is the definition of theft under the Theft Act 1968 s.1?
      A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.
    • What is the actus reus of theft?
      The actus reus of theft is the appropriation of property of another or assuming the right of the owner.
    • What case illustrates the actus reus of theft regarding appropriation?
      The case of R v Morris illustrates the actus reus of theft regarding appropriation.
    • Is there theft if the defendant has been lent the property of another?
      No, there is no theft if the defendant has been lent the property of another.
    • What happens if the defendant does something with the property that he is not entitled to do?
      It can amount to appropriation for the purpose of the act.
    • s.3 of the theft act deals with appropriation in R V Gomez it was held by the house of lords that an appropriation is any interference with any of the rights of the owner .it takes place as soon as the owners rights is interfered with and it can occur even though the owner appears to consent to the taking as in R V Morris where D appropriated property by merely switching price labels on goods as this was something that interfered with the owners rights. And in Gomez the possession of D was approved by V but it was under a deceit
    • What case illustrates the appropriation of property through selling it without permission?

      The case of R v Pitham and Hehl illustrates the appropriation of property through selling it without permission.
    • What can happen if the defendant does not return the property?
      Not returning the property can amount to appropriation for the purpose of the act.
    • How can appropriation occur through deceit?
      Appropriation can occur through deceit as illustrated in cases like R v Links and R v Lawrence.
    • What are the key elements of theft under the Theft Act 1968?
      • Dishonest appropriation of property
      • Belonging to another
      • Intention to permanently deprive the owner
    • What are the implications of appropriation in theft cases?
      • Appropriation can occur even if property is lent
      • Actions like selling or not returning property can constitute appropriation
      • Deceit can also lead to appropriation
    • What was the main action of the defendant in R v Morris?
      The defendant switched labels on supermarket goods.
    • What did the House of Lords decide in R v Morris regarding appropriation?
      The House of Lords decided that the defendant appropriated the goods by assuming the rights of the owner.
    • How did the defendant in Lawrence v MPC appropriate the fare from the passenger?
      The defendant overcharged the passenger through deceit.
    • What was the outcome of R v Hinks regarding gifts obtained through exploitation?
      Gifts obtained through exploitation could also constitute appropriation.
    • How much money did the defendant in R v Hinks accept from the older man?
      The defendant accepted gifts totaling up to £60,000.
    • What was the main action of the defendant in R v Gomez?
      The defendant convinced his manager to accept two stolen checks as payment.
    • What was Gomez's argument regarding the manager's consent in the transaction?
      Gomez argued that there was no appropriation because the manager consented to the transaction.
    • What did the House of Lords rule regarding appropriation in R v Gomez?
      The House of Lords ruled that appropriation could occur even if the owner consented to the transfer.
    • How does the concept of appropriation differ in R v Hinks compared to R v Gomez?
      In R v Hinks, appropriation involved exploitation of a vulnerable person, while in R v Gomez, it involved deceit despite consent.
    • What does property include under s.4(1)?
      Money and all other property real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property
    • Can shares be considered property that can be stolen?
      Yes, shares can be stolen as they are included in property
    • Which items cannot be considered property capable of theft according to s.4(3) and s.4(4)?
      Wild plants and wild animals
    • What are the three circumstances under which land can be stolen according to s.4?
      1. A trustee takes land in breach of his duties (e.g., forges documents).
      2. Someone not in ownership of the land severs part of the land (e.g., moves a fence).
      3. A tenant takes a fixture or structure from the land.
    • What is an example of a breach of duty by a trustee that could lead to land theft?
      A trustee forging documents to make it look like he is the legal owner
    • How can someone who does not own land commit theft by severing part of it?
      By moving part of a fence into their neighbor's land to make it look like it's part of their land
    • What action can a tenant take that may constitute theft of land?
      A tenant taking a fixture or structure from the land
    • What is the significance of s.4(1) in relation to property and theft?
      It defines what constitutes property that can be subject to theft
    • In a scenario where a trustee forges documents, what type of property theft is being committed?
      Theft of land
    • What implications does the inability to steal wild plants and animals have on property law?
      It indicates that certain natural resources are not considered property under theft laws
    • A01 – PROPERTY MUST BE BELONGING TO ANOTHER Under s.5 the Property must belong to another. A property is regarded as belonging to any person having possession or control or any proprietary rights.s.5(3) covers situations where property is handed over to another person to be dealt with in a particular way. If a person deals with the property in a different way he can be guilty of theft ( Davidge v brunette ) s.5(4) deals with property that is acquired by mistake. A person acquiring property by mistake is under a obligation to return it.
    • What is the mens rea for theft according to S.2?
      Dishonesty
    • What does S.6 state regarding the intention to permanently deprive?
      It refers to the intention to take property forever or for a period equivalent to outright taking
    • What are the three situations where a defendant will not be considered dishonest?
      1. D believes he has a legal right to the property
      2. D believes he has the consent of the property owner
      3. D believes the property owner cannot be traced by taking reasonable steps
    • What test is used to prove that a defendant was dishonest?
      A dishonesty test established by Ivy v Genting Casinos Ltd
    • How does the jury determine if the defendant's conduct was honest or dishonest?
      By applying the objective standards of ordinary decent people
    • What is the first step in the dishonesty test established by Ivy v Genting Casinos Ltd?
      The jury decides subjectively the actual state of the defendant's knowledge or belief
    • What does S.6(1) specifically address regarding property?
      It addresses whether the defendant permanently deprives the property of another
    • What is the legal definition of "permanently deprive" in the context of theft?
      An intention to take property forever or for a period equivalent to outright taking
    • What are the key components of the mens rea for theft?
      • Dishonesty (S.2)
      • Intention to permanently deprive (S.6)
    See similar decks