Theft Mindmap
- Created by: Dan Edwards
- Created on: 31-03-13 16:05
View mindmap
- Theft
- s.1(1) Theft Act 1968
- A person who dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving them of it is guilty of theft
- Dishonestly - s.2 - Mens Rea
- Appropriates - s.3 - Actus Reus
- Property - s.4 - Actus Reus
- Belonging to another - s.5 - Actus Reus
- With the intention of permanently depriving the other of it - s.6 - Mens Rea
- A person who dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving them of it is guilty of theft
- s.4 Theft Act 1968
- Appropriation
- The Act does not provide a definition on what is meant by rights of an owner
- However doing something with the property that only the owner has the right can do can amount to an appropriation
- Selling
- Keeping
- Destroying
- Damaging
- Extinguishing
- An assumption of any of the rights of the owner
- s.3(1) Theft Act 1968
- Appropriation by keeping or dealing
- This includes, where D has come by the property (innocently) without stealing it, and any later assumption of rights by keeping or dealing with it as owner
- The following can amount to appropriation
- Offering the property for sale - Pitham and Hehl (1976)
- Taking the property
- Disposing of the property - Osman (1997)/Ngan (1997)
- Pledging the property
- Damage or destroy the property
- FIxing the price of the property - Morris (1983)
- The following can amount to appropriation
- This includes, where D has come by the property (innocently) without stealing it, and any later assumption of rights by keeping or dealing with it as owner
- However doing something with the property that only the owner has the right can do can amount to an appropriation
- An assumption of any of the rights of the owner
- s.3(1) Theft Act 1968
- The following can amount to appropriation
- Offering the property for sale - Pitham and Hehl (1976)
- Taking the property
- Disposing of the property - Osman (1997)/Ngan (1997)
- Pledging the property
- Damage or destroy the property
- FIxing the price of the property - Morris (1983)
- Relevance of Consent or Authority
- Even if the owner consents or authorises the appropriation, it may still be theft
- R v Lawrence (1972)
- Even if authorisation is by way of a gift, it may still be theft
- R v Hinks (2001)
- Exceptions are possible
- In favour of bona fide purchasers
- A person who purchases the property in good faith will not be guilty under s.3(2) Theft Act 1968
- In favour of bona fide purchasers
- Appropriation as a continuing act
- Appropriation continues for so long the thief can be sensibly regarded as being in the act of stealing
- Atakpu & Abrahms (1993)
- Appropriation continues for so long the thief can be sensibly regarded as being in the act of stealing
- Between decisions of Lawrence and Gomez, there were a number of cases that considered the issue of whether all dealings with property were an appropriation
- R v Meech (1974)
- Eddy v Ninman (1981)
- R v Skipp (1975)
- Dobson v General Accident Fire and Life Assurance Corp (1990)
- Even if the owner consents or authorises the appropriation, it may still be theft
- Cheques and Bank Accounts
- Appropriation takes place where the credit balance in the victims account is reduced and the equivalent sum is transferred into the defendant's account
- R v Williams (Roy) (2000)
- R v Preddy (1996)
- Signing company cheques for own benefit amounts to an appropriation
- R v Kohn (1979)
- Appropriation takes place where the credit balance in the victims account is reduced and the equivalent sum is transferred into the defendant's account
- The Act does not provide a definition on what is meant by rights of an owner
- Belonging to Another
- Property shall be regarded as belonging to any person having possession or control of it or having in it any proprietary rights or interest
- s.5 (1) Theft Act (1968)
- It is essential that the defendant is charged with theft of property from the actual owner of the property
- R v Dyke and Munro (2002)
- Ownership and possession or control
- It is impossible to steal property which is wholly owned by themselves
- Powell v McRae (1977)
- A defendant may in certain circumstances steal his own property
- R v Turner (no2) (1971)
- Property may be stolen from anyone having any proprietary right or interest in it, even if precarious or short lived
- Just because a defendant owns property jointly with the victim he is still capable of stealing it from him
- R v Dunbar (1994)
- R v Huskinson (1988)
- Property received for a particular purpose
- If D acquires legal ownership but is under and obligation to deal with it in a certain way, property regarded as belonging to another for the purpose of s.5(3)
- The obligation must be legal not moral
- Obligation must be to deal with that property
- R v Hall (1972)
- Lewis v Lethbridge (1987)
- Obligation must be to deal with that property
- The obligation must be legal not moral
- If D acquires legal ownership but is under and obligation to deal with it in a certain way, property regarded as belonging to another for the purpose of s.5(3)
- It is impossible to steal property which is wholly owned by themselves
- Acquired by mistake
- s.5(4) Theft Act 1968
- R v Gilks (1972)
- AGR (no.1) (1983)
- s.5(4) Theft Act 1968
- Ownerless property - a person can't steal property that isn't owned by anyone at the time of appropriation
- Lost is not equivalent to abandonment!
- Property is only abandoned when the owner is indifferent to any future appropriation of the property by others
- Property shall be regarded as belonging to any person having possession or control of it or having in it any proprietary rights or interest
- Dishonesty - Theft Act (1968) only provides a negative and partial definition
- R v Feely (1973) - dishonesty is a question of fact
- 3 situations defendants should not be deemed to be dishonest
- If D appropriates property in the belief that he has in law the right to deprive others of it
- s.2(1)(a)
- R v Holdon (1991)
- If D appropriates the property in belief that he would have the others consent if the other knew
- s2(1)(b)
- R v Small (1988)
- If D appropriates the property in the belief that the person whom the property belongs cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps
- s.2(1)(c)
- If D appropriates property in the belief that he has in law the right to deprive others of it
- s.1(1) Theft Act 1968
Comments
No comments have yet been made