Theft: Section 1 Theft Act

What Act and Section defines Theft?

Section (1)(1) Theft Act 1968

How was Theft defined in Theft Act 1968?

“A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention to permanently deprive the other of it”

What are the three sections of theft AR?

• There must be an appropriation (S3)

• Of property (S4)

• Which belongs to another (S5)

What are the two sections of theft’s MR?

• Dishonestly (S2)

• Intention to permanently deprive (S6)

What is appropriation defined as?

“Any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner”

Morris (1983)

Facts - D swapped price labels on two items in a supermarket

Principle - This was an appropriation because D had assumed the owner’s right to decide the price of which the goods were to be sold.

Lawrence (1971)

Facts - D was italian and did not understand the taxi fare. He gave V his wallet and D took a further 6 pounds.

Principle - D was still guilty of theft. Even though V consented it was not real consent because it was induced by fraud.

Gomes (1993)

Facts - D persuaded his manager, V, to sell to X, who was using stolen cheques to buy which D knew.

Principle - The consent of the owner is irrelevant. Anyone doing anything to another’s property with or without consent is appropriating it.

What are the two types of property?

• Real Property

• Personal Property

What is real property?

Land and anything attached to land

What is personal property?

Typically money, belongings and intangible property like theatrical rights or trademarks.

What does section(4)(2) say cannot be stolen?

Land

What is an offence to abstract?

It is an offence to abstract electricity

Oxford v Moss (1979)

Facts - D borrowed an exam paper which had not yet been taken. He read it, copied it and returned it.

Principle - It was not theft, all he had taken was confidential information the test contained.

What is it not a theft to steal in section (4)(3)?

Not a theft to steal mushrooms, fruit, foliage or flowers that are growing wild, unless it is for sale or reward

What is it not a theft to steal in section (4)(4)?

Not a theft to steal an animal that is wild

What does belonging to another mean?

It must belong to another at the time of the appropriation. Ownership can be over-ridden by another’s interest in the property.

Turner (1971)

Facts - D took his car without paying after the garage had repaired it.

Principle - The garage had enough legal interest in the car to have it “belonging to another”

Woodman (1974)

Facts - X owned a derelict site where Y could take scrap metal off of. A few years later D went onto the property and took the remaining metal.

Principle - Once it is established a person owns everything on a site, he is assumed to own everything on it. - No such thing as abandoned property

What situation does section(5)(3) cover?

“A person receives property and is under obligation to deal with it in a certain way, the property still belongs to the other.”

Klimeberg and Marsden (1999)

Facts - K and M sold timeshares. The purchasers money was but in a fund until they were built. 500k was paid but only 200k went in fund.

Principle - K and M were guilty because they were under an obligation to deal with the money in a certain way.

Hall (1973)

Facts - D was a travel agent who received deposits for flights. He then went bankrupt and could not repay.

Principle - He was not guilty of theft as there was no dishonesty by him and these clients were no different from other customers.

Davage v Burnett (1984)

Facts - D was given money to pay a gas bill but instead he bought christmas presents.

Principle - He was guilty of theft, there was a legal relationship between them for S(5)(3)

What is section(5)(4) of the Theft Act

Where a person obtains another’s property by anothers mistake - There is no fraud by D.

What is D under obligation to do if he obtains property by another’s mistake?

Make restoration of it, or else he will be regarded as dishonest and guilty of theft

What did the theft act deliberately not define?

Dishonesty - it only gave examples of where a person is not to be regarded as dishonest.

What does Section 2(1)(a) state about dishonesty?

A person is not dishonest if he appropriates property believing he has a LEGAL RIGHT to deprive the other

What does section 2(1)(b) say about dishonesty?

D is not dishonest if he believes the owner had consented or would have consented. D would have to produce evidence to support this.

What does section 2(1)C say about dishonesty?

Is not dishonest if he believes that the owner could not be traced by taking reasonable steps to find him. This depends upon the nature of property and the circumstances as to which it was found.

What case contains the common test of dishonesty?

Ivey (2017)

Ivey (2017)

Facts - D, a professional gambler, ‘won’ 7.7 million at a casino. The owners refused to pay saying he cheated.

Principle - He was not dishonest and was practicing legitimate gamesmanship. It created the Ivy test adopted in Barton and Booth

Barton and Booth (2020)

Facts - Charged with numerous offences of fraud, theft and conspiracy through being beneficiaries of old people’s wills.

Principle - A jury must decide, according to the standards of reasonable and honest people, whether what was done was dishonest.

Why does it now not matter what D thought?

Because the dishonesty test is objective and not subjective.

Hinks (2000)

Facts - D befriended a low IQ and naive V. He took out his life savings and put it into D’s account. V was mentally capable to know what a valid gift was.

Principle - A gift with no deception can still be an appropriation. D was dishonest as she knew she was taking advantage of him.

DPP v J (2001)

Facts - D took and then broke V’s headphones, then handed them back.

Principle - This was an Intention to permanently deprive

When does an ITPD become easier to prove?

The longer that D keeps the property or if he does anything with it

What does section(6)(1) say about an intention to permanently deprive?

• An ITPD can be if a borrowing amounts to an “outright taking of it” where he has “treated himself as the owner of it”

• Can also be if a borrower has returned it as a thing of “no-value”

Lloyd (1985)

Fact - D worked in a cinema and took films so that copies could be made by associates.

Principle - No theft, the films were returned in original state and had lost no practical value.

Lavender (1994)

Facts - D removed two doors from a council house to replace two broken ones at his girlfriend’s council house.

Principle - D intended to treat the doors as his own, so was guilty of theft

Marshall (1998)

Facts - D obtained travel cards from London Underground from members of the public and sold them on to others.

Principle - LU still had an over riding legal interest, The tickets were appropriated as soon as they possessed them, the value to LU was deprived because LU weren’t getting the revenue.

What is section (6)(2) of the theft act?

D borrows X’s property and loans it to another on the condition that he might not be able to perform.

Velumyl (1989)

Facts - D took money from the company safe and gave to a friend on the condition he returned it later. A spotcheck was done in meantime.

Principle - Guilty. D had no intention to return the same bank notes, only the equivalent amount of money.