[TYPE THE COMPANY NAME]
LCR4805 Assignment
2 Semester 2 | Due 4
September 2025
NO PLAGIARISM
[Pick the date]
[Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of
the document. Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of
the contents of the document.]
, Exam (elaborations)
LCR4805 Assignment 2 Semester 2 | Due 4
September 2025
Course
Selected Private and Criminal Law Principles of th (LCR4805)
Institution
University Of South Africa (Unisa)
QUESTION 1 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.
Theft of Information in South African Law
The common law definition of theft in South Africa is the unlawful and intentional
appropriation of a movable, corporeal thing belonging to another with the intention to
permanently deprive the owner of it. ⚖️ This definition is a major hurdle when trying to
prosecute the theft of information, which is intangible. The law has struggled to keep up with
technological advancements because information, in and of itself, is not a "movable, corporeal
thing."
The Common Law Position in South Africa
South African courts have consistently held that information, standing alone, cannot be the
subject of common law theft. The key reason is the requirement for the property to be corporeal
(physical) and movable. When a person copies information, the original owner is not "deprived"
of it—they still possess it. This was affirmed in cases such as R v Nkomo, which, while not
directly on point, established the principle that for theft to occur, there must be a deprivation of
possession.
This legal gap has forced prosecutors to resort to other common law offenses to address the
wrongful taking of data, such as fraud, extortion, or malicious injury to property, depending on
the circumstances. For instance, if the information is used to deceive someone into a financial
transaction, it could be prosecuted as fraud. However, this is not a direct charge for the theft of
the data itself.
Comparative Discussion: Other Jurisdictions
LCR4805 Assignment
2 Semester 2 | Due 4
September 2025
NO PLAGIARISM
[Pick the date]
[Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of the contents of
the document. Type the abstract of the document here. The abstract is typically a short summary of
the contents of the document.]
, Exam (elaborations)
LCR4805 Assignment 2 Semester 2 | Due 4
September 2025
Course
Selected Private and Criminal Law Principles of th (LCR4805)
Institution
University Of South Africa (Unisa)
QUESTION 1 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.
Theft of Information in South African Law
The common law definition of theft in South Africa is the unlawful and intentional
appropriation of a movable, corporeal thing belonging to another with the intention to
permanently deprive the owner of it. ⚖️ This definition is a major hurdle when trying to
prosecute the theft of information, which is intangible. The law has struggled to keep up with
technological advancements because information, in and of itself, is not a "movable, corporeal
thing."
The Common Law Position in South Africa
South African courts have consistently held that information, standing alone, cannot be the
subject of common law theft. The key reason is the requirement for the property to be corporeal
(physical) and movable. When a person copies information, the original owner is not "deprived"
of it—they still possess it. This was affirmed in cases such as R v Nkomo, which, while not
directly on point, established the principle that for theft to occur, there must be a deprivation of
possession.
This legal gap has forced prosecutors to resort to other common law offenses to address the
wrongful taking of data, such as fraud, extortion, or malicious injury to property, depending on
the circumstances. For instance, if the information is used to deceive someone into a financial
transaction, it could be prosecuted as fraud. However, this is not a direct charge for the theft of
the data itself.
Comparative Discussion: Other Jurisdictions
