Cards (22)

  • Morris outlined that the assumption of 'any rights of the owner of the goods' amounts to theft
  • Gomez outlined that there can be appropriation even with the owners consent. Consent obtained by 'false representation'.
  • Hink outlined that the acceptance of a gift can be appropriation if it was obtained through D being deceptive.
  • Oxford V Moss outlined that information is not property
  • Kelly and Lindsay outlined that body parts are stolen if the body parts have a purpose
  • S.4(3) outlined that wild plants, berries etc are exempt from theft unless it is used to be sold
  • s.4(4) outlined that wild tamed or untamed animals cannot be stolen unless it is to be sold
  • Webster -Owner had proprietary right over property
  • Turner - 'thief' has proprietary right but not possession and control
  • Turner - stealing back car from the garage
  • Webster - 2nd medal sent to him by MoD
  • Kelly and Lindsay - Body parts stolen
  • Oxford v Moss - Information on exam paper
  • Hinks - Mother taking advantage of naive man
  • Gomez - bouncing cheques in electrical store
  • Morris - label switching
  • What did s.5 outline?

    Belonging to another - 'any person having possession or control of it, or having in it any proprietary interest'
  • What did s.4(1) outline?

    ''property'' includes money and all other property, real or personal, including things in action or other intangible property
  • What did s.3 outline?

    Appropriation - The assumption of the rights of the owner at the time or later (Morris, Gomez, Hicks)
  • What does s.5(3) specify?
    If property is received under an obligation (Davidge v Bunnett and Hall)- under obligation to retain and deal with the property in a particular way.
  • What does s.5(4) specify?
    If received by acciedent - under obligation to make restoration - AG's reference no.1 obligation to restore, Gilks states: no obligation if it is a betting transaction
  • Abandonment and rubbish: find the P+C and the PR of the item