Property offences : Theft

where is the law on theft set out and what type of offence is it?

• statutory offence

• Section 1 of the Theft Act 1968

• maximum 7 years imprisonment

what is the definition of theft?

theft act 1968, s.1:

dishonestly appropriating property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving them of it.

what are the key elements?

AR:

• appropriation (s.3)

• property (s.4)

• beloning to another (s.5)

MR:

• dishonesty (s.2)

• intention to permanently deprive (s.6)

what is appropriation? (AR)

defined in s.3:

• ‘any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner.'

how was appropriation complete in PITHAM AND HEHL 1997? (AR)

D offered to sell furniture of man who was in prison. court decided appropriation was complete even if the furniture was not sold as D had assumed rights of the owner by attempting to sell. ow h

how was appropriation complete in MORRIS 1983? (AR)

D changed the price of an item in the shop but did not get through the checkout. theft is complete if accompanied with dishonestly and intent to deprive, no need for D to leave the shop.

what is later appropriation? (AR)

s.3(1) - where ‘D has come by the property without stealing it, and later assumes the right to it by keeping or dealing with it as an owner.

what cases demonstrates that appropriation can take place even with the consent of the owner? (AR)

LAWRENCE 1972

• Italian student in taxi, journey should have been 50p but D took £1 and a further £6 from students open wallet.

GOMEZ 1993

• D worked in electrical shop, accomplice bought £17k of good with stolen cheques. D convinced owner of ship that safe to accept cheques. although consent obtained by deception, still theft.

HINKS 2001

• D befriended low intelligence man and convinced to give her money everyday. £60k was appropriation even if technically a gift.

what is property? (AR)

s.4 - ‘money and all other property real or personal including things in action and other intangible property.’

eg. money, personal possessions, real (estate), intangible (eg. patents) and things in action (eg. bank transfer)

what are things that cannot by stolen? (AR)

confidential information:

• OXFORD V MOSS 1979 - D took exam paper, read and returned, couldn’t be charged with theft of information.

fungus, flowers, fruit and foliage, s.4(3)

• provided growing wild and not picked for reward or sale.

wild creatures, s.4(4)

• provided not tamed or in captivity

how is ‘belonging to another’ defined?(AR)

s.5 - ‘property shall be regarded as belonging to any person having possession or control over it, or having any proprietary right or interest.’

possession or control (AR)

usually the owner but P does not have to prove who the owner is.

• TURNER 1971 - D took own car from garage without paying and guilty as garage had possession until payment.

which cases demonstrate that it is possible to be in possession and control without knowing? (AR)

• WOODMAN 1974 - company in control of scrap metal without knowing it was there, (left by a purchaser who didn’t want that bit). D took remains but guilty even if company not aware.

• RICKETTS V BASILDON MAGISTRATES’ COURT 2010 - D took bag of goods from outside charity shop as well as from bins. bag still from giver until shop took possession.

what is meant by proprietary interest? (AR)

once someone has proprietary right or interest it doesn’t matter that someone exists who has a better right. where D owns property and also has possession and control, can still be guilty if another person has proprietary interest.

what case demonstrates proprietary interest? (AR)

WEBSTER 2006 - D received 2 medals from MOD instead of 1 and tried to sell 2nd of eBay but MOD still had proprietary interest.

what does it mean when ‘property received under an obligation may be treated as belonging to another’ (AR)

s.5(3), where property is received by D and D is under an obligation to deal with it in a particular way, it may be theft if D fails to do so.

what case shows ‘property received under an obligation may be treated as belonging to another’ (AR)

DAVIDGE V BUNNETT 1984 - D given money by flatmates to pay gas but spent on xmas gifts instead. guilty as legal obligation to deal with property in a particular way.

how is ‘property received by mistake’ described?(AR)

s.5(4) - provides that where a person receives property by mistake and is under a legal obligation to return it, then the property is regarded as belonging to the other person.

what case shows ‘property received by mistake?’ (AR)

A-G’S REFERENCE (NO.1 OF 1983) - D overpaid by employers and decided not to repay. Court decided was legally obliged to return under s.5(4) even though had ownership of money when in her bank account.

how is ‘lost property’ described? (AR)

it still belongs to the original owner and can be stolen but abandoned property cannot be subject of theft.

what case shows ‘lost property’? (AR)

SMALL 1988 - car left in place for 2 weeks with doors unlocked. D took car and court said no theft as it was abandoned.

what are the 3 situations that are not dishonest? s.2(1) (MR)

s.2 as no statutory definition of dishonesty.

• s.2(1)(a) - D believes he has a legal right to deprive the other.

• s.2(1)(b) - D believe in the other’s consent.

• s.2(1)(c ) - D believes the owner cannot be found by taking reasonable steps.

what case shows the use of the s.2(1 situations? (MR)

HOLDEN 1991 - D charged with theft of scrap tires, said he saw other employees taking them home so thought it was permitted

as test is subjective, all D has to show is that he honestly believed he had the right.

what is the Ivey/ Barton & Booth test? (MR)

• when none of s.2 situation apply, jury must use common sense in deciding if D was dishonest or not.

• if further guidance needed then jury applies 2-part test, set out in IVEY 2007 and confirmed in R V BARTON & BOOTH 2020.

• only used if situation not covered by s.2(1)

what happened in BARTON & BOOTH 2020 and what is the test for dishonesty? (MR)

D’s ran a care home and stole money from residents.

court of appeal adopted test for dishonesty:

• what was the D’s actual state of knowledge or belief as to the facts?

• was his conduct dishonest by the standards of ordinary decent people?

what is said in s.2(2)? (MR)

an appropriation can still be dishonest even thought the accused was willing to pay.

how is ‘intention to permanently deprive’ defined? (MR)

intent exists if D intends owner to lose property forever. however s.6 makes clear D may still intend to permanently deprive ‘without meaning the owner to permanently lose the thing itself.’

D must intend to permanently derive but there need not be a permanent deprivation in fact.

what are the 2 points in s.6? (MR)

• where D intends to treat property as his own to dispose of regardless of the other’s rights.

• where property is borrowed in circumstances equivalent to an outright taking.

what case shows ‘where D intends to treat property as his own to dispose of regardless of the other’s rights.’ ? (MR)

LAVENDER 1994 - D took doors from council house and used them to replace gf’s council flat. there was intent to deprive as D’s intent was to treat doors as own and dispose regardless of council’s right.

what case shows ‘where property is borrowed in circumstances equivalent to an outright taking?’ (MR)

LLOYD 1985 - D was a projectionist and took film overnight to make illegal copy.

circumstances not equivalent to an outright taking as the ‘goodness’ or practical value had not gone out of value.

what is conditional intent and what case shows it?

• if D picks up property to assess whether anything worth stealing but puts it back, no intent to permanently deprive.

• EASOM 1971 - D rummaged though handbag and then returned it without taking anything. Court said conditional intent to deprive not enough for theft. (but could be charged with attempts.)