Theft

• Theft

  Offences Against Property (OAP) - Theft Act 1968.
• s.1 Theft Act 1968


  'The dishonest appropriation of property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving another of it.
• Theft actus reus


  Appropriation of property belonging to another.
• Appropriation


  s.3 Theft Act 1968 - 'to assume the rights of an owner'.
• R v Morris 1983


  Swapped labels and tried to take cheaper item, conviction for theft upheld - assumed the owner's rights.
• R v Vinall 2011 - touching property


  Stole boy's bike and left it nearby, Court of Appeal stated appropriation and assuming the rights of an owner was the a) initial taking of the bike, b) the act of abandoning the bike.
• R v Pitham and Hehl 1977


  Sold someone else's furniture - held to be appropriation, doesn't matter if owner was never deprived of the property.
• Lawrence v Commissioner for Metropolitan Police 1972 - consent

  Took more money than needed out of Italian student's wallet, Court stated this was appropriation despite being offered the money
• R v Hinks 2000 - accepting gifts


  V of limited intelligence but understood giving gifts, D given £60,000 and was given a TV, withdrew £300 a day, House of Lords decided it was valid gift but was appropriation.
• Later assumption of a right


  Appropriation can occur when a D acquires property but chooses not to give it back
• Property that can be appropriated


  Money, personal property, real property, things in action, other intangible property (Theft Act 1968)
• Things in action


  Bank account, credit card, tickets, gym membership card
• Attorney-General for Hong Kong v Chai Nai-Keung 1987

  Expert quota for textiles was intangible property that could be stolen - a patent can also be stolen.
• Oxford v Moss 1979


  D read exam paper and put it back, charged with theft but not convicted as information is not property under s.4 Theft Act 1968.
• Property that cannot be appropriated


  Wildflowers and fruit, wild creatures, confidential information, body parts.
• Belonging to another

  s.5 Theft Act 1968 - another person having possession or control over it, doesn't have to be the owner.
• Ricketts v Basildon Magistrates Court 2010


  Goods left outside a charity shop could be taken as they either belonged to the donor or the charity shop.
• Another person have possession


  Means you can appropriate the property from someone who has already stolen the property, your own property
• R v Turner (No.2) 1971


  Took car after repairs had been made without paying, garage was in possession of car as they had the right to retain possession of the item being repaired until payment is made (repairer's lien).
• Property received under an obligation


  Property will be handed over on the basis they will use/deal with it and then fail to do so.

  s.5 Theft Act 1968 - property is still considered to belong to another even though the defendant has possession and control of it.
• R v Hall 1972


  Received deposits for clients for trips to America, never organised tickets and didn't return money, convicted quashed as under no obligation to deal with them in a particular way.
• R v Klineberg and Marsden 1999


  Sold timeshare apartments in Lanzarote, each paid on understanding it would be held in independent trust, guilty of theft as under clear obligation 'to deal with property or proceeds in a particular way.
• Davidge v Bunnett 1984


  Given money to pay gas bill by flatmates and bought Christmas presents, found guilty as there was a legal obligation to deal with money in particular way.
• Property received by mistake


  s.5(4) Theft Act 1968: if you receive something by mistake and are under legal obligation to return it, that property belongs to another and should be returned.
• A-G's Ref (No.1 of 1983) 1985

  Police officer received overpayment of wages and recognised this, did not withdraw money but did not return it, convicted of theft of property as she was under an obligation to return it.
• Theft mens rea

  1. Dishonestly (appropriating), 2. Intention to permanently deprive.
• Dishonestly

  Theft Act 1968 doesn't define 'dishonestly' but gives guidance in s.2(1).
• Non-dishonest situations


  1. Have the right to deprive the other, on the behalf of the appropriation and the circumstances of it - s.2(1)(a)

  2. Would have the other's consent if the other knew of the appropriation - s.2(1)(b).

  3. The person the property belongs to cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps - s.2(1)(c).
• Theft Act 2(1)(a)

  R v Robinson 1977 - went to collect money owed to him and got in a fight in which money fell out of victims pocket, no theft as he had honest belief he was entitled to the money.
• Barton and Booth 2020 - Dishonesty Test


  1. What was the defendant's actual state of knowledge or belief as to the facts?

  2. Was his conduct dishonest by the standards of ordinary decent people?
• Intention to permanently deprive (ITPD) - s.6 Theft Act 1968


  Intention to treat property as your own or dispose of as your own
• R v Velumyl 1989

  Took money from office safe as he was owed money by a friend and would replace it, Court of Appeal upheld conviction as they would not be the same banknotes even if replaced with the same value.
• Lloyd 1985

  Borrowing became 'an intention to permanently deprive, when the goodness, the virtue, the practical value had gone out of the property.
• R v Easom 1971 - conditional threat


  Rummaged through handbag, conviction of theft quashed as there was no evidence of intention to permanently deprive the owner.
• Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset Constabulary v Smith 1984


  Broke into parked car and removed cases, concealed nearby after searching them, Court stated plain intent as the cases were disposed of rather than taken back into the car.