offences against property

• theft

  • s.1 of the theft act 1968
  • 'the dishonest appropriation of property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it'
  • actus reus consists of appropriation, property and belonging to another.
  • mens rea consists of dishonesty and intention to permanently deprive.
• appropriation

  • s.3 theft act 1968: definition ' to assume the rights of an owner' e.g. taking, touching, moving, selling, destroying
  • the defendant's assumption of any one right of the owner is sufficient to be an appropriation - doesn't have to mean 'all rights'
  • R v Morris (1983) - switched price labels in supermarket, he had taken item with 'lower' price but was arrested before checkout. His conviction for theft was upheld as he had assumed the owner's rights.
• appropriation

  • this means that touching someone's property is an appropriation
  • R v Vinall (2011) - defendants took a bike and abandoned it a short distance away. appropriation occurred in the bike and/or the abandoning of the bike.
  • appropriation can take place even with the consent of the owner
  • Lawrence v Commissioner for Metropolitan Police (1972) - taxi driver took too much money from proffered wallet of his passenger who did not speak the same language. the consent to appropriation of the money was only to the correct amount, not the excess because of the deception.
• property

  • S4(1) theft act 1968 - 'property' includes money and all other property, real or personal, things in action and other intangible property.
  • money = means coins and banknotes of any currency
  • personal property = covers all moveable items such as books, jewellery, clothes and cars.
  • real property = legal term for land and buildings
  • things in action = a right that can be enforced against another person by taking legal action.
  • other intangible property = refers to others rights which have no physical presence but can be stolen such as data in a computer game.
• property

  • property that cannot be appropriated
  • wild flowers and fruit - unless picked for commercial purposes
  • wild creatures - unless they are tamed or held in captivity
  • confidential information - oxford v moss 1979 = defendant stole an exam paper and read the questions and then returned the paper
  • body parts - unless some technique or skill has been applied to them. Kelly and Lindsay 1998 = 2 men stole preserved body parts for art. court ruled they were property due to medical preservation, making it illegal.
• belonging to another

  • s.5(1) theft act 1968 - 'property shall be regarded as belonging to any person having possession or control of it, or having in it any proprietary right or interest'.
  • property has to be genuinely abandoned to be regarded as not belonging to another. lost property still has an owner.
  • another person having possession or control means - you can appropriate property from someone who has already stolen the property or you can even appropriate your own property.
• cases for belonging to another

  • r v turner 1971 - defendant took his car from repairer without paying using spare key. courts ruled repairer had right to retain car until payment. that right over the car was stolen.
  • R v Woodman 1974 - all scrap on a site had been sold and buyer removed it but left some behind. subsequently taken by defendant. the scrap left behind was capable of being stolen.
  • Ricketts v Basildon magistrates court 2010 - there were goods left outside charity shop as a donation to the charity. these goods could be stolen as they either belonged to the donor of the goods or the charity shop.
• proprietary interest

  • property wont be regarded as belonging to another is where that property has been entirely abandoned because the person who owned the property intended to abandon it.
  • it must be proved that no-one maintains any rights over the property, if property is lost this doesn't mean it is abandoned.
  • even if property is not in possession and control of owner as the owner they still maintain a proprietary right.
• belonging to another

  • S5 lists certain situations where D can be guilty of theft even though property may not 'belong to another'.
  • trust property (s5(2)) - where property is held by a trustee on behalf of another.
  • property received under an obligation (s5(3)) - sometimes the property will be handed over to the defendant on the basis that the D will use or deal with it in a certain way, but then fails to do so.
  • section 5 theft act 1968 says that the property is still considered to belong to another even though the defendant has possession and control of it.
  • property received by mistake (s5(4)) - if you receive something by mistake and are under a legal obligation to return it, then that property belongs to another and should be returned.
• Dishonesty

  • appropriation of property must be done 'dishonestly'
  • theft act 2(1)(a) - if D appropriates the property in the belief that he has the right in law to deprive the other of it. R v Robinson - D went to collect money he was owed, and kept a £5 note which dropped out of the debtor's husbands pocket. there was no theft because he had an honest belief that he was entitled to the money.
  • theft act 2(1)(b) - if D believes that he would have the other's consent if the other knew of the appropriation.
  • theft act 3(1)(c) - if D appropriates the property in the belief that the person to whom the property belongs cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps.
• intention to permanently deprive

  • s6(1) - ITPD will be satisfied where there is an 'intention to treat the thing as his own to dispose of, regardless of other rights'
  • borrowing is not normally regarded as an intention to permanently deprive.
  • conditional theft is not ITPD but you could be charged with attempted theft.
  • how the property is disposed of is evidence of supporting the inference of intention to permanently deprive.
• ITPD cases

  • DPP v Lavender 1994 - D used doors from a council property to replace damaged doors in his girlfriend's council flat. D was dealing with the doors as his own by moving them from one property to another without permission.
  • Lloyd 1985 - stated that borrowing became 'intention to permanently deprive' when the goodness, the virtue, the practical value had gone out of the property'
  • Easom 1971 - D rummaged through a handbag in a cinema, and replaced it without taking anything. D had not intended to permanently deprive the owner of the bag or items in it so he could not be guilty of theft.
• robbery

  • theft act 1968 s.8 - 'a person is guilty of robbery if he commits theft, and immediately before or at the time of doing so, he uses force on any person or puts any person in fear of force'
  • actus reus contains - a complete theft, force or threat of force on any person, immediately before or at the time of the theft, the force must be used to steal.
  • mens rea consists of must having the mens rea for theft and intention to use force to steal.