S.1 theft act 1968:
s.1(1) “a person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property
belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of
it.”
s.1(2) “it is immaterial whether the appropriation is to make a gain or is made
for the thief’s own benefit.”
AR: appropriation of property belonging to another.
MR: dishonesty and with the intention of permanently depriving them.
(elements are s.2 and s.6)
S.2 - dishonesty (part of MR): no definition of dishonesty, it will either be
obvious from the evidence, the Ivey test from Ivey v Genting Casinos will be
applied, or s.2(1)(a), (b), or (c) may apply. Ivey v Genting casinos - 1. What
was the actual state of D’s knowledge and belief as to facts? 2. In the context
of (a), was D’s conduct dishonest according to the ordinary standards of a
reasonable and honest person. *This case modified the Ghosh test for
dishonesty and was confirmed by Barton and Booth (2020). s.2(1) theft act
says: 1. s.2(1)(a) - D believes they had a right in law to deprive on behalf of self
or 3rd person - Robinson. s.2(1)(b) - D believes the other person would
consented if they knew the circumstances - Holden. s.2(1)(c) - D believes the
person the property belongs to could not be discovered by taking reasonable
steps - Small. D’s belief only needs to be genuine, not reasonable - Holden.
s.2(2) - a person’s appropriation of property belonging to another may be
dishonest notwithstanding that he is willing to pay for the property.
S.3 - appropriates (part of AR): s.3(1) any assumption by a person of the rights
of an owner amounts to an appropriation. Appropriation may be damaging,
possessing, consuming, selling, lending, changing or using the property.
, Morris; Rule 1 - any assumption of the rights of the owner is enough to be
appropriated (only need one right to be assumed). Rule 2 - price switching is
an appropriation. Pitham and Hehl; property does not have to be taken to be
an appropriation. Lawrence; there can be an appropriation even with the
consent of the owner. Hinks; even when there’s no deception in obtaining the
consent of the owner and it’s a valid gift, this can be an appropriation of
property. Later appropriations - s.3(1) appropriation can occur after the
taking, if you later assume the right to something. Theft is complete at the
moment of appropriation.
S.4 - property (part of AR): issues with defining property; e.g. is sunlight
property, are body parts property, is information property. Generally,
property is something with monetary value. s.4(1) - money, real or personal
property, things in action and other intangible property. Types: money (notes
& coins), real property (lands & buildings), personal property (anything
moveable, big or small), things in action (have no physical presence but are
rights which can be enforced against another person in law e.g. bank
accounts, cheques, shares), other intangible property (no physical presence
e.g. export, quota, patent). s.4(3) - mushrooms, flowers or fruits growing wild
are not property unless it’s done for reward, sale or other commercial
purpose. Wild creatures taken from an estate are not theft, however an animal
taken from a zoo is theft as it is “ordinarily kept in captivity.” Oxford v Moss
- information isn’t property. Kelly and Lindsay - body parts aren’t property,
unless they have acquired different attributes due to the application of skill or
preservation techniques.
S.5 - belonging to another (part of AR): property belongs to whoever has
possession or control or a proprietary right or interest in the property. Turner
s.1(1) “a person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property
belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of
it.”
s.1(2) “it is immaterial whether the appropriation is to make a gain or is made
for the thief’s own benefit.”
AR: appropriation of property belonging to another.
MR: dishonesty and with the intention of permanently depriving them.
(elements are s.2 and s.6)
S.2 - dishonesty (part of MR): no definition of dishonesty, it will either be
obvious from the evidence, the Ivey test from Ivey v Genting Casinos will be
applied, or s.2(1)(a), (b), or (c) may apply. Ivey v Genting casinos - 1. What
was the actual state of D’s knowledge and belief as to facts? 2. In the context
of (a), was D’s conduct dishonest according to the ordinary standards of a
reasonable and honest person. *This case modified the Ghosh test for
dishonesty and was confirmed by Barton and Booth (2020). s.2(1) theft act
says: 1. s.2(1)(a) - D believes they had a right in law to deprive on behalf of self
or 3rd person - Robinson. s.2(1)(b) - D believes the other person would
consented if they knew the circumstances - Holden. s.2(1)(c) - D believes the
person the property belongs to could not be discovered by taking reasonable
steps - Small. D’s belief only needs to be genuine, not reasonable - Holden.
s.2(2) - a person’s appropriation of property belonging to another may be
dishonest notwithstanding that he is willing to pay for the property.
S.3 - appropriates (part of AR): s.3(1) any assumption by a person of the rights
of an owner amounts to an appropriation. Appropriation may be damaging,
possessing, consuming, selling, lending, changing or using the property.
, Morris; Rule 1 - any assumption of the rights of the owner is enough to be
appropriated (only need one right to be assumed). Rule 2 - price switching is
an appropriation. Pitham and Hehl; property does not have to be taken to be
an appropriation. Lawrence; there can be an appropriation even with the
consent of the owner. Hinks; even when there’s no deception in obtaining the
consent of the owner and it’s a valid gift, this can be an appropriation of
property. Later appropriations - s.3(1) appropriation can occur after the
taking, if you later assume the right to something. Theft is complete at the
moment of appropriation.
S.4 - property (part of AR): issues with defining property; e.g. is sunlight
property, are body parts property, is information property. Generally,
property is something with monetary value. s.4(1) - money, real or personal
property, things in action and other intangible property. Types: money (notes
& coins), real property (lands & buildings), personal property (anything
moveable, big or small), things in action (have no physical presence but are
rights which can be enforced against another person in law e.g. bank
accounts, cheques, shares), other intangible property (no physical presence
e.g. export, quota, patent). s.4(3) - mushrooms, flowers or fruits growing wild
are not property unless it’s done for reward, sale or other commercial
purpose. Wild creatures taken from an estate are not theft, however an animal
taken from a zoo is theft as it is “ordinarily kept in captivity.” Oxford v Moss
- information isn’t property. Kelly and Lindsay - body parts aren’t property,
unless they have acquired different attributes due to the application of skill or
preservation techniques.
S.5 - belonging to another (part of AR): property belongs to whoever has
possession or control or a proprietary right or interest in the property. Turner
