Theft

• Act and Definition

  Theft Act 1968, S.1- "The dishonest appropriation of property which belongs to another with the intention to permanently deprive"
• Actus Reus


  • Appropriation- S.3
  • Property- s.4
  • Belonging to another- s.5
• Definition of Appropriation 


  • Possession or control, assumption of owners rights, deceived consent
  • R v Morris- Changing the price tickets
  • R v Pithelm and Hehl- Selling property that isn't yours
  • Lawrence v MPC- Taxi driver taking too much money
  • R v Gomez- Fake cheques
  • R v Hinks- accepting gifts from patient
• Property 


  S.4(1)- "includes money and all other property, real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property

  Oxford v Moss- Cant steal confidential information

  S.4(3)+(4)- cannot steal wild berries or animals aslong as you are not stealing them
• What does S.5(1) define as belonging?

  Belonging is possession or control over property or having a proprietary interest.
• What does the case R v Turner illustrate about stealing?

  It illustrates that a person can steal their own property.
• What is the legal principle regarding abandonment in theft cases?

  You cannot steal something if it has been truly abandoned.
• What does the case R v Woodman establish about abandonment?

  It establishes that property was not truly abandoned in that case.
• What does the case Williams v Phillips involve?

  It involves stealing from bins.
• What does the case Rickets v Basildon Magistrates Court address?

  It addresses stealing from charity shop steps.
• What does S.5(3) state about money given for purchasing items?

  If given money to buy something, you must use it for that purpose; otherwise, it is stealing.
• What does S.5(4) say about items given by mistake?

  If given something by mistake, you have the responsibility to return it; failing to do so is stealing.
• What case is referenced in S.5(4) regarding the responsibility to return mistakenly given items?

  The case referenced is A-G 1983.
• Dishonesty


  3 cases where the person is not dishonest

  • D believes he has legal right to the property
  • D believes he has consent from the property owner
  • D believes the owner cannot be traced

  Test for dishonest

  • Jury must subjectively decide what the D's knowledge of the facts in question
  • Jury must then decide (objectively) dishonest or honest in terms of the actions of ordinary decent people.

  Ivey v Genting Casinos, put into crim law by Barton and Booth v r
• Intention to permanently deprive 


  S.6- intention to permanently take it away from the owner

  R v Velumyl- Returned different bank notes- permanently deprived of the original property

  Can also be found if value is lost whilst the property is in D's possession

  S.6(1)- "for a period and in circumstances making it equivalent to an outright taking or disposal"- can turn borrowing into stealing