BTEC Law – Unit 5 – P1, M1
Alex Omidvar
P1: Apply the law with respect to theft, robbery and burglary in given situations
M1 - Analyse the law on theft, robbery and burglary in a given scenario providing a reasoned
conclusion
Introduction
In this assignment, I am going to demonstrate the different types of property offences including
theft, robbery and burglary. For each type, the actus reus and mens rea are going to be
thoroughly and comprehensively illustrated with relevant case examples, scenarios and
analysis. For each scenario, I will be looking at their acus reu and mens rea while fully analysing
them. There will be separate conclusions for each of the scenarios in which I will be deciding
whether the defendants are guilty or not.
Theft:
Section 1(1) of the Theft Act 1968 (TA 1968) establishes the offence of theft. This section states
“A person is guilty of theft of the dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with
the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.”
Actus Reus
Appropriation – s.3
The section 3 states the law as such “Any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner
amounts to an appropriation, and his includes where he has come by the property (innocent or
not) without stealing it, any later assumption of a right to it by keeping or dealing with it as an
owner.” This statement refers that theft could occur in various occasion. For instance, if
someone has lend you a book and you decide to sell it, that classes as theft.
Property – s.4
Section 4(1) illustrates the definition of property for the aim of theft. The law states “property
includes money and all other property, real or personal, including things in action and other
intangible property”
General
Things in action are essentially rights which can be enforced with pursuing a legal action, as
they are not in any physical form. For instance, an employee owes some money to a company.
Such a debt is classed as a thing in action. It exists in a way that the company could sell that to
someone else, who would then have the authority to collect money from the employee. There
1
Alex Omidvar
P1: Apply the law with respect to theft, robbery and burglary in given situations
M1 - Analyse the law on theft, robbery and burglary in a given scenario providing a reasoned
conclusion
Introduction
In this assignment, I am going to demonstrate the different types of property offences including
theft, robbery and burglary. For each type, the actus reus and mens rea are going to be
thoroughly and comprehensively illustrated with relevant case examples, scenarios and
analysis. For each scenario, I will be looking at their acus reu and mens rea while fully analysing
them. There will be separate conclusions for each of the scenarios in which I will be deciding
whether the defendants are guilty or not.
Theft:
Section 1(1) of the Theft Act 1968 (TA 1968) establishes the offence of theft. This section states
“A person is guilty of theft of the dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with
the intention of permanently depriving the other of it.”
Actus Reus
Appropriation – s.3
The section 3 states the law as such “Any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner
amounts to an appropriation, and his includes where he has come by the property (innocent or
not) without stealing it, any later assumption of a right to it by keeping or dealing with it as an
owner.” This statement refers that theft could occur in various occasion. For instance, if
someone has lend you a book and you decide to sell it, that classes as theft.
Property – s.4
Section 4(1) illustrates the definition of property for the aim of theft. The law states “property
includes money and all other property, real or personal, including things in action and other
intangible property”
General
Things in action are essentially rights which can be enforced with pursuing a legal action, as
they are not in any physical form. For instance, an employee owes some money to a company.
Such a debt is classed as a thing in action. It exists in a way that the company could sell that to
someone else, who would then have the authority to collect money from the employee. There
1
