-Theft-
THE THEFT ACT 1968
The Theft Act defines theft in section 1 as:
A person who dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently
depriving the other of it
Sections 2-6 of the act help with the meaning of the words in the definition:
Section 2 - Dishonesty
Section 3 - Appropriates
Section 4 - Property
Section 5 - Belonging to another
Section 6 - Intention of permanently depriving
ACTUS REUS OF THEFT
Section 3,4 and 5 make up the actus reus of theft
SECTION 3 - 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.”
Assuming the rights of the owner - It is the act of taking
The rights of the owner include:
- Selling it (R v Pitham and Hehl - D sold someone's furniture )
- Destroying it
- Possessing it
- Consuming it
- Using it
- Modifying it (R v Morris - Switching labels)
- Lending it
- Hiring it out
Appropriation with Consent
Where what the victim consented to does not happen
(Lawrence) - D was a taxi driver who drove an Italian student who spoke little English and the tourist offered £1 but
D said more money was needed and took £6 from his open wallet
D argues the V had consented to the taking of money however the court stated that there was appropriation
(Gomez) - D was a shop assistant who lied to the manager that two cheques presented by a friend were valid
Although the appropriation took place with the owners consent it is still amount to appropriation under the definition
in the Theft Act
, Appropriation without deception
Taking advantage of a vulnerable victim for the defendants gain or advantage
(Hinks) - D was a carer of a 53 year old man with a low IQ. D persuaded the victim to gift her almost all of his
savings (£60,000)
The HOLs held that even though it was a valid gift there was an appropriation
A later assumption of right
It is made clear that there can also be appropriation where the D acquires property without stealing it but then later
decides to keep or deal with the property as if they own it. In this case the appropriation takes place at the point of
'keeping' or 'dealing'
SECTION 4 - Property
“property shall be regarded as belonging to any person having possession or control of it, or having in it any
proprietary right or interest.”
Property includes money and all other property real or personal including things in action and other intangible
property
Section 4 lists 5 types of items which are included in the definition of property
1) Money
2) Real property (Land and buildings)
Section 4 (2) states that land can only be stolen in three particular circumstances:
a) Does so in a special capacity such as a trustee or under a power of attorney and deals with it in a way that
b) Someone not in possession of the land
c) Being in possession of the land under tenancy
3) Personal property (Covers all moveable items)
(Kelly and Lindsay) - Ds stole body parts from the royal college of surgeons to make sculptures
It was the personal property of the college for teaching purposes so it was counted as theft
4) Things in action (Does not physically exist but gives the owner legal rights)
- Cheque
5) Other intangible property
- Money in a bank account
- Shares
- Intellectual property
(Oxford v Moss) - D took an exam paper, read the questions and then returned it
D could not be charged for theft of the info on the paper as knowledge can not be stolen
THE THEFT ACT 1968
The Theft Act defines theft in section 1 as:
A person who dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently
depriving the other of it
Sections 2-6 of the act help with the meaning of the words in the definition:
Section 2 - Dishonesty
Section 3 - Appropriates
Section 4 - Property
Section 5 - Belonging to another
Section 6 - Intention of permanently depriving
ACTUS REUS OF THEFT
Section 3,4 and 5 make up the actus reus of theft
SECTION 3 - 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.”
Assuming the rights of the owner - It is the act of taking
The rights of the owner include:
- Selling it (R v Pitham and Hehl - D sold someone's furniture )
- Destroying it
- Possessing it
- Consuming it
- Using it
- Modifying it (R v Morris - Switching labels)
- Lending it
- Hiring it out
Appropriation with Consent
Where what the victim consented to does not happen
(Lawrence) - D was a taxi driver who drove an Italian student who spoke little English and the tourist offered £1 but
D said more money was needed and took £6 from his open wallet
D argues the V had consented to the taking of money however the court stated that there was appropriation
(Gomez) - D was a shop assistant who lied to the manager that two cheques presented by a friend were valid
Although the appropriation took place with the owners consent it is still amount to appropriation under the definition
in the Theft Act
, Appropriation without deception
Taking advantage of a vulnerable victim for the defendants gain or advantage
(Hinks) - D was a carer of a 53 year old man with a low IQ. D persuaded the victim to gift her almost all of his
savings (£60,000)
The HOLs held that even though it was a valid gift there was an appropriation
A later assumption of right
It is made clear that there can also be appropriation where the D acquires property without stealing it but then later
decides to keep or deal with the property as if they own it. In this case the appropriation takes place at the point of
'keeping' or 'dealing'
SECTION 4 - Property
“property shall be regarded as belonging to any person having possession or control of it, or having in it any
proprietary right or interest.”
Property includes money and all other property real or personal including things in action and other intangible
property
Section 4 lists 5 types of items which are included in the definition of property
1) Money
2) Real property (Land and buildings)
Section 4 (2) states that land can only be stolen in three particular circumstances:
a) Does so in a special capacity such as a trustee or under a power of attorney and deals with it in a way that
b) Someone not in possession of the land
c) Being in possession of the land under tenancy
3) Personal property (Covers all moveable items)
(Kelly and Lindsay) - Ds stole body parts from the royal college of surgeons to make sculptures
It was the personal property of the college for teaching purposes so it was counted as theft
4) Things in action (Does not physically exist but gives the owner legal rights)
- Cheque
5) Other intangible property
- Money in a bank account
- Shares
- Intellectual property
(Oxford v Moss) - D took an exam paper, read the questions and then returned it
D could not be charged for theft of the info on the paper as knowledge can not be stolen
