Section 3 - Appropriation
PITHAM & HEHL
- D stole furniture that was not his
- assumed ownership of this property - appropriation
- D switched the labels of items in a shop
- he then left the shop with one of the items without paying
- both of these acts show he assumed ownership of this property - appropriation
SO THE DEFENDANT NEED NOT ASSUME ALL OWNERSHIP RIGHTS... HE NEED ONLY TO ASSUME ONE!
Section 6 - Intention of Permanent Deprivation
- took money from a safe as work, claiming he intended to repay
- held to be permanent depravation as there was no way the notes he intended to replace were going to be the exact notes he took
DPP V LAVENDER
- D took unused doors from the council and used them to replace doors in his gf's flat
- he was permanently depriving the council of their property
- D has conditional intent (intent if he found something worth stealing) to steal a bag but did not
- would now be held to have an intent to permanently deprive
RAPHAEL AND ANOTHER
- Ds forcefully took V's car and then demanded money upon return
Theft - Theft Act 1968
SECTION 1- definition
'a person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it'
SECTION 2 - dishonesty
SECTION 3 - appropriation
SECTION 4 - property
SECTION 5 - belonging to another
SECTION 6 - with intention of permanent deprevation
Section 3 - Appropriation
WHAT ABOUT WHERE P HAS CONSENTED TO APPROPRIATION?
- D took money from foreign P's wallet who opened it for him
- P was clueless and so could not have consented
- D convinced an unknowing P to accept void cheques (these bounced)
- D had consented to accepting valid cheques - not void ones - and so consent was decieved
- D took a large sum of money and a TV from P who offered them to him
- This is an example of consent without deception
Section 4 - Property
KELLY AND LINSDAY
- Held body parts to be property when taken from the Royal College of Surgeons
Section 2 - Dishonesty
- D was owed money by V and got into a fight with V's husband
- £5 fell from V's husbands pocket and D took it
- held to not be dishonest as he believed he had the right to deprive of money he was owed
- D acted as a locum consulant
- he claimed fees for an operation he had not carried out
- stated this was the same cost of the consultation fees he was owed
LEAD TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE GHOSH TEST FOR DISHONESTY:
1. Would a reasonable and honest person see the act as dishonest?
2. Did the defendant realise he was being dishonest?
Section 5 - Belonging to Another
When does something belong to you? When you have possession, control and/or a proprietary interest over it...
TURNER - D took his own car from the mechanics without paying; the car belonged to them at that time as they had possessin over it
WOODMAN - D took scrap metal from P's land; P did not know it was there; still belonged to P regardless as it was possessed on land she owned
PROPERTY MUST BE DEALT WITH AS P HAS REQUESTED...
DAVIDGE V BUNNETT - D spent money given by P to pay bills on christmas presents
WHERE P HAS MISTAKENLY GIVEN PROPERTY TO D, HE HAS THE 'RIGHT TO RESTORATION'
A-G'S REFERENCE - D was overpaid by her workplace; did not 'restore'; held to be theft