LCR4805
Assignment 2
Unique No:801278
Due 2025
, LCR4805
Selected Private and Criminal Law Principles of the Internet
Assignment 2 – Semester 2, 2025
Question 1
We live in an “information age” and the question which often arises is whether
information can be stolen. Refer to the common law definition of “theft” and critically
discuss whether the law in South Africa has adapted to keep up with technological
advancements. Discuss comparatively by referring to the positions in other jurisdictions
and include case law, legislation and academic commentary where applicable. (20
marks)
Answer (Plagiarism-Free Structured Outline)
Introduction
In South African common law, theft is generally defined as the unlawful taking of
another’s property with the intention of permanently depriving them of it.
The key challenge in the digital era is whether intangible assets, such as data
and information, qualify as “property” capable of being stolen.
South African Common Law
The traditional scope of theft is limited to corporeal, movable items.
Courts have recognised exceptions, for instance:
o S v Graham (1975): electricity was accepted as something that could be
stolen.
o S v Mintoor (1996): confirmed theft of electricity.
Despite these developments, information or digital data still does not fall neatly
within the definition.
Assignment 2
Unique No:801278
Due 2025
, LCR4805
Selected Private and Criminal Law Principles of the Internet
Assignment 2 – Semester 2, 2025
Question 1
We live in an “information age” and the question which often arises is whether
information can be stolen. Refer to the common law definition of “theft” and critically
discuss whether the law in South Africa has adapted to keep up with technological
advancements. Discuss comparatively by referring to the positions in other jurisdictions
and include case law, legislation and academic commentary where applicable. (20
marks)
Answer (Plagiarism-Free Structured Outline)
Introduction
In South African common law, theft is generally defined as the unlawful taking of
another’s property with the intention of permanently depriving them of it.
The key challenge in the digital era is whether intangible assets, such as data
and information, qualify as “property” capable of being stolen.
South African Common Law
The traditional scope of theft is limited to corporeal, movable items.
Courts have recognised exceptions, for instance:
o S v Graham (1975): electricity was accepted as something that could be
stolen.
o S v Mintoor (1996): confirmed theft of electricity.
Despite these developments, information or digital data still does not fall neatly
within the definition.
