PROPERTY OFFENCES
Conduct crime v result crime
- Conduct crime: act or omission in a specific circumstance (rape, theft, fraud)
- Result crime: requires a prohibited result (e.g. death)
Theft Act 1968, S. 1(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’
- Each element must be satisfied for D to be held liable and convicted for theft;
to find liability, the prosecution must prove that D has satisfied every element
and that these elements occurred at the same time
- Conduct crime > result crime
5 aspects of property law that must be satisfied:
- ‘Dishonestly’ - reflects state of mind
- Appropriation - assumption of owners’ rights
- Property - Property’ includes money and all other property, real or personal,
including things in action and other intangible property.
- Belonging to another - Property shall be regarded as belonging to any
person having possession or control of it, or having in it any proprietary (s 5.1)
right or interest’.
- Intention of permanently depriving - D must intend permanently to deprive
the owner of the property - If he intends to return the item, this is not theft.
*
i) Real property is a reference to land. Thus, subject to the specific exclusions
discussed later, D can be liable for the theft of certain land rights.
ii) Personal property is a reference to all property that is not land and that includes
property that is illegal or prohibited. For example, D commits theft where she
appropriates controlled drugs from V, even where they are illegally possessed by V
ii) Things in action category of intangible property where D has the right to sue
another for a particular sum (e.g. bank account)
iv) Other intangible property
Mens rea of theft:
Dishonestly, intention to permanently deprive
Actus rea of theft:
Appropriation of property belonging to another
, - Theft: D dishonestly appropriates V’s property with the intent to permanently
deprive.
- Robbery: D uses force to steal V’s property.
- Burglary: D trespasses onto V’s property, committing (or intending to commit)
one or more listed offences.
- Handling stolen goods: D deals in specified ways with V’s property, which
has been stolen.
- Blackmail: D threatens V in order to gain her property.
- Criminal damage: D damages V’s property.
S3 Theft Act 1968 ‘Appropriation’: Any assumption by a person of the rights of an
owner amounts to an appropriation, and this includes, where he has come by the
property (innocently or not) without stealing it, any later assumption of a right to it by
keeping or dealing with it as owner
1. Actus Reus: Property
- Section 4 (1) provides that ‘“Property” includes money and all other property,
real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property.’
- Money: This refers to current coins and banknotes.
- Real property is land and things attached to the land such as houses.
- Personal property is everything that is not real property. In general terms it is
everything you own, your laptop, your watch, your wallet, your bag, your
books, your iPad, your belongings, your pets.
- Intangible: The Larceny Act concentrated on tangible, i.e., physical, property,
but the Theft Act 1968 includes things in action or intangible property.
‘Intangible’ means that you cannot touch it.
- A ‘thing in action’ (sometimes called a ‘chose in action’) - generally refers to a
personal property right that you can legally claim, often in relation to credit or
debt owed to you. It is credit or debt.
- Real property is land and things attached to the land such as houses.
- S.4(2) makes clear that a person cannot steal land.
- Exception 1: By virtue of section 4(2)(a), a trustee authorised to sell or
dispose of trust land would commit theft if they dishonestly made an
unauthorised disposal of the property
- S.4(2)(b) deals with the appropriation by persons not in possession of the land
- a person with no rights to the land can steal anything forming part of the land
(eg shrubs)
- S. 4(2)(c), a tenant may be guilty of theft where he appropriates any fixture or
structure let to be used with the land
- Section 4(3) deals with the circumstances in which things growing wild on
land may be stolen
, - Section 4(4) deals with wild animals.
Odds & Sods
- Water stored in an artificial container is property under s. 4(1) Theft Act 1968
(Ferens v O’Brien).
- Gas is also property under s. 4(1) Theft Act 1968 (R v. White)
- Electricity belongs in a special category and not something which would fall
under section 1 (Low v Blease), If D uses electricity without authority, D will
be charged with abstracting electricity dishonestly contrary to section 13 of the
Theft Act which is a separate offence.
- Confidential information is also not property
(Oxford v Moss) a student took exam papers before an exam, but returned the
papers.
- Services are not property. But services obtained by a person for themselves
or another, if obtained dishonestly, would be an offence contrary to section 11
of the Fraud Act 2006.
- Traditionally, human bodies and body parts have not been classed as
property within section 4. The idea is that “A person’s hand or fingers are not
a thing.”
- R v Sharpe: the law recognises no property in a corpse
- However, once a limb, organ or sample has been removed from the body and
stored in, say, a sperm or blood bank, it possesses all the attributes of
personal property and could fall within s. 4(1).
Yearworth v North Bristol NHS Trust (sperm)
- Hospital which held sperm samples given by claimants who were receiving
fertility treatment
- Fridges that trust owned malfunctioned, sperm samples destroyed
- Sperm samples very important to claimant who was receiving cancer
treatment & represented his last chance to conceive
- Courts initially found in favour of hospital → sperm not included in
property under Theft Act → appeal
- HELD: court established duty of care, concept of ownership was established
w regards to sperm (can become property, like blood, for purposes of Theft
Act)
R v Welsh (urine sample).
- Arrested for being unfit to drive, had to give urine sample
- Poured urine down the sink, convicted for theft
- HELD: property was urine of the police, convicted (urine, like blood & sperm,
can be considered property)
- Elsewhere, the Human Tissue Act 2004 governs ownership of body parts.
Conduct crime v result crime
- Conduct crime: act or omission in a specific circumstance (rape, theft, fraud)
- Result crime: requires a prohibited result (e.g. death)
Theft Act 1968, S. 1(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’
- Each element must be satisfied for D to be held liable and convicted for theft;
to find liability, the prosecution must prove that D has satisfied every element
and that these elements occurred at the same time
- Conduct crime > result crime
5 aspects of property law that must be satisfied:
- ‘Dishonestly’ - reflects state of mind
- Appropriation - assumption of owners’ rights
- Property - Property’ includes money and all other property, real or personal,
including things in action and other intangible property.
- Belonging to another - Property shall be regarded as belonging to any
person having possession or control of it, or having in it any proprietary (s 5.1)
right or interest’.
- Intention of permanently depriving - D must intend permanently to deprive
the owner of the property - If he intends to return the item, this is not theft.
*
i) Real property is a reference to land. Thus, subject to the specific exclusions
discussed later, D can be liable for the theft of certain land rights.
ii) Personal property is a reference to all property that is not land and that includes
property that is illegal or prohibited. For example, D commits theft where she
appropriates controlled drugs from V, even where they are illegally possessed by V
ii) Things in action category of intangible property where D has the right to sue
another for a particular sum (e.g. bank account)
iv) Other intangible property
Mens rea of theft:
Dishonestly, intention to permanently deprive
Actus rea of theft:
Appropriation of property belonging to another
, - Theft: D dishonestly appropriates V’s property with the intent to permanently
deprive.
- Robbery: D uses force to steal V’s property.
- Burglary: D trespasses onto V’s property, committing (or intending to commit)
one or more listed offences.
- Handling stolen goods: D deals in specified ways with V’s property, which
has been stolen.
- Blackmail: D threatens V in order to gain her property.
- Criminal damage: D damages V’s property.
S3 Theft Act 1968 ‘Appropriation’: Any assumption by a person of the rights of an
owner amounts to an appropriation, and this includes, where he has come by the
property (innocently or not) without stealing it, any later assumption of a right to it by
keeping or dealing with it as owner
1. Actus Reus: Property
- Section 4 (1) provides that ‘“Property” includes money and all other property,
real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property.’
- Money: This refers to current coins and banknotes.
- Real property is land and things attached to the land such as houses.
- Personal property is everything that is not real property. In general terms it is
everything you own, your laptop, your watch, your wallet, your bag, your
books, your iPad, your belongings, your pets.
- Intangible: The Larceny Act concentrated on tangible, i.e., physical, property,
but the Theft Act 1968 includes things in action or intangible property.
‘Intangible’ means that you cannot touch it.
- A ‘thing in action’ (sometimes called a ‘chose in action’) - generally refers to a
personal property right that you can legally claim, often in relation to credit or
debt owed to you. It is credit or debt.
- Real property is land and things attached to the land such as houses.
- S.4(2) makes clear that a person cannot steal land.
- Exception 1: By virtue of section 4(2)(a), a trustee authorised to sell or
dispose of trust land would commit theft if they dishonestly made an
unauthorised disposal of the property
- S.4(2)(b) deals with the appropriation by persons not in possession of the land
- a person with no rights to the land can steal anything forming part of the land
(eg shrubs)
- S. 4(2)(c), a tenant may be guilty of theft where he appropriates any fixture or
structure let to be used with the land
- Section 4(3) deals with the circumstances in which things growing wild on
land may be stolen
, - Section 4(4) deals with wild animals.
Odds & Sods
- Water stored in an artificial container is property under s. 4(1) Theft Act 1968
(Ferens v O’Brien).
- Gas is also property under s. 4(1) Theft Act 1968 (R v. White)
- Electricity belongs in a special category and not something which would fall
under section 1 (Low v Blease), If D uses electricity without authority, D will
be charged with abstracting electricity dishonestly contrary to section 13 of the
Theft Act which is a separate offence.
- Confidential information is also not property
(Oxford v Moss) a student took exam papers before an exam, but returned the
papers.
- Services are not property. But services obtained by a person for themselves
or another, if obtained dishonestly, would be an offence contrary to section 11
of the Fraud Act 2006.
- Traditionally, human bodies and body parts have not been classed as
property within section 4. The idea is that “A person’s hand or fingers are not
a thing.”
- R v Sharpe: the law recognises no property in a corpse
- However, once a limb, organ or sample has been removed from the body and
stored in, say, a sperm or blood bank, it possesses all the attributes of
personal property and could fall within s. 4(1).
Yearworth v North Bristol NHS Trust (sperm)
- Hospital which held sperm samples given by claimants who were receiving
fertility treatment
- Fridges that trust owned malfunctioned, sperm samples destroyed
- Sperm samples very important to claimant who was receiving cancer
treatment & represented his last chance to conceive
- Courts initially found in favour of hospital → sperm not included in
property under Theft Act → appeal
- HELD: court established duty of care, concept of ownership was established
w regards to sperm (can become property, like blood, for purposes of Theft
Act)
R v Welsh (urine sample).
- Arrested for being unfit to drive, had to give urine sample
- Poured urine down the sink, convicted for theft
- HELD: property was urine of the police, convicted (urine, like blood & sperm,
can be considered property)
- Elsewhere, the Human Tissue Act 2004 governs ownership of body parts.
