Study Notes on Theft in Law

8.1 Definition of Theft

• Theft is defined under s $1$ of the Theft Act $1968$:

  • "A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it."

• Sections $2$-$6$ provide clarification on the elements of this definition.

8.1.1 Dishonesty (s $2$)

• Section $2$ does not provide a positive definition of dishonesty but outlines three situations in s $2(1)$ where a person is not considered dishonest:

  1. s $2(1)(a)$: If they believe they have a legal right to the property for themselves or a third person (e.g., R v Robinson [$1977$]).

  2. s $2(1)(b)$: If they believe the owner would have consented if they knew of the appropriation and the circumstances.

  3. s $2(1)(c)$: If they believe the owner cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps.

• The Ivey Test: Established in Ivey v Genting Casinos ($2017$) and confirmed in R v Barton and Booth ($2020$), the current test for dishonesty is:

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

  • Was their conduct dishonest by the standards of ordinary decent people?

• Willingness to Pay (s $2(2)$): An appropriation can still be dishonest even if the person is willing to pay for the property.

8.2 Appropriation (s $3$)

• Appropriation Defined: Section $3(1)$ states, "Any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner amounts to an appropriation."

• Case Examples:

  • R v Vinall ($2011$): Appropriation includes both the initial taking and the subsequent abandonment of property.

  • R v Pitham and Hehl ($1977$): Offering to sell property belonging to another is an assumption of the owner's rights.

  • R v Morris ($1983$): Switching price labels assumed the owner's right to determine the price.

• Consent and Appropriation:

  • Lawrence v Commissioner for Metropolitan Police ($1972$): Appropriation can occur even if the owner consents to the property being taken.

  • R v Gomez ($1993$): Consent obtained through deception still constitutes appropriation.

  • R v Hinks ($2000$): An absolute gift can be an appropriation if the recipient is dishonest.

• A Later Assumption of a Right: Under s $3(1)$, if a person comes by property without stealing it but later assumes an owner's right (by keeping or dealing with it), an appropriation occurs at that later stage.

8.3 Property (s $4$)

• Definition: Under s $4$, property includes money, personal property, real property, things in action, and other intangible property.

• Types of Property:

  • Money: Cash and banknotes.

  • Personal Property: Tangible movable items.

  • Real Property (Land): Land can only be stolen in limited cases (s $4(2)$), such as by a trustee or when someone severs something from the land (e.g., digging up flowers).

  • Things in Action: Rights enforceable by law, like a bank account balance.

  • Intangible Property: Property with no physical existence, like a patent.

• Exclusions:

  • Wild Growth (s $4(3)$): A person cannot steal mushrooms, flowers, fruit, or foliage growing wild unless they do so for reward or sale.

  • Wild Creatures (s $4(4)$): Wild creatures cannot be stolen unless they have been reduced into possession or are in the process of being so.

  • Knowledge: Confidential information is not property (Oxford v Moss [$1979$]).

8.4 Belonging to Another (s $5$)

• Property is regarded as belonging to any person having possession or control of it, or having any proprietary right or interest (s $5(1)$).

• Case Examples:

  • R v Turner (No. $2$) ($1971$): An owner can steal his own property if another person is in possession of it.

  • R v Woodman ($1974$): One can be in control of property even if they are unaware it is on their land.

• Special Provisions:

  • Trust Property (s $5(2)$): Property is treated as belonging to any person who has a right to enforce the trust.

  • Property Received under Obligation (s $5(3)$): If property is received to be dealt with in a particular way, it still "belongs to another" for the purposes of the Act (R v Klineberg and Marsden [$1999$]).

  • Property Received by Mistake (s $5(4)$): There is a legal obligation to restore property received by mistake (e.g., an overpaid wage in Attorney-General’s Reference (No $1$ of $1983$) [$1985$]).

8.5 Intention to Permanently Deprive (s $6$)

• The defendant must intend to permanently take the property from the owner.

• Treating as One’s Own to Dispose Of (s $6(1)$): This includes cases where the defendant doesn't strictly intend the owner to never see the item again but treats it as their own to dispose of (e.g., taking tickets and reselling them in R v Marshall [$1998$]).

• Borrowing and Lending: Borrowing is only considered theft if it is for a period and in circumstances making it equivalent to an outright taking (R v Lloyd [$1985$]).

• R v Robinson [$1977$]: Established that a genuine belief in a legal right to property negates dishonesty under s $2(1)(a)$.

• Ivey v Genting Casinos ($2017$): Established the two-stage objective test for dishonesty: determining the defendant's actual state of knowledge or belief and then whether their conduct was dishonest by the standards of ordinary decent people.

• R v Barton and Booth ($2020$): Confirmed that the Ivey test is the correct standard for dishonesty in criminal law cases.

• R v Vinall ($2011$): Clarified that appropriation includes both the initial taking and the subsequent abandonment of the property.

• R v Pitham and Hehl ($1977$): Demonstrates that offering to sell property belonging to another is an assumption of the owner's rights, constituting appropriation.

• R v Morris ($1983$): Confirmed that switching price labels assumes the owner's right to determine price and satisfies the element of appropriation.

• Lawrence v Commissioner for Metropolitan Police ($1972$): Ruled that appropriation can occur even if the owner consents to the property being taken.

• R v Gomez ($1993$): A higher court authority confirming that consent obtained through deception still constitutes a valid appropriation.

• R v Hinks ($2000$): Ruled that an absolute legal gift can still be an appropriation if the recipient is acting dishonestly.

• Oxford v Moss [$1979$]: Held that confidential information, such as the content of an exam paper, is not "property" that can be stolen under s $4$.

• R v Turner (No. $2$) ($1971$): Proved that a legal owner can steal his own property if another person is currently in possession or control of it.

• R v Woodman ($1974$): Established that a party can be in control of property even if they are unaware the property is physically on their land.

• R v Klineberg and Marsden [$1999$]: Property received with a specific obligation to handle it in a certain way still "belongs to another" per s $5(3)$.

• Attorney-General’s Reference (No $1$ of $1983$) [$1985$]: Established that there is a legal obligation to restore property received by mistake, such as an overpaid wage, under s $5(4)$.

• R v Marshall [$1998$]: Found that reselling items (like unexpired tickets) is treating the property as one's own to dispose of, satisfying s $6(1)$.

• R v Lloyd [$1985$]: Borrowing or lending only amounts to an intention to permanently deprive