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.
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.