First 458 words of the document:
Making off without payment.
Section 3(1) states that: ` a person who, knowing that payment on the spot for any goods
supplied or service done is required or expected from him, dishonestly makes off without
having paid as requires or as expected and with intent to avoid payment of the amount due
shall be guilty of an offence.'
The goods or service supplied must be done lawful as unlawful acts are not covered by the
act i.e. selling alcohol to underage children. The act covers situations such as not paying for a
taxi, haircut or customers going off without paying for their meal in a restaurant.
Actus Reus of making off without payment
It has to be proved that the D makes off, goods have been supplied or a service done,
payment is required on the spot & D has not paid as required.
This is when the D leaves the scene knowing that payment is expected; McDavitt: D had
refused to pay for the bill of a meal but instead of leaving the restaurant he stayed in the
toilet as he had been advised that the police had been called; this was held to not be making
off as he had not left the building.
Goods have been supplied or a service done
If the service is not completed then there is no offence as demonstrated in the case of
Troughton v Metropolitan Police: Here the D had hired a taxi to his house but the journey
was not complete which meant that this was a breach of contract by the taxi as he had not
reached his house.
Payment required on the spot
It has to be proved that the payment for the service was required on the spot, if it is not
then there has not been an offence as in Vincent: Here the D had made an agreement with a
hotel to pay his bill at a later date so payment was not expected even if the agreement had
been dishonestly made.
Mens rea of making off without payment
Dishonestly: the test for dishonesty is the two part Ghosh test. Knowledge that
payment on the spot is required; if the D does not know that payment on the spot is
required then he is not guilty. Intention to avoid payment: House of Lords state that
they must be intention to permanently to avoid payment; Allen: Conviction was quashed as
the D intended to pay for the services at a later date thus not permanently avoiding