Theft

Appropriating property belonging to another 

Treating property as your own; this can be done by assuming any right of the owner such as consuming, selling or breaking it

R v Morris: assuming any right of the owner can be classed as appropriation

Lawrence v MPC: even if there is consent there can still be an appropriation

R v Hinks: appropriation can be present if the property was a gift if it was gained in a dishonest way

Almost anything can be stolen. S4 of the Theft Act 1968 as: Money and all other property, real (land and anything permanently attatched to it) or personal, including things in action and other intangible property.

Things in action = something you have a right to e.g. concert tickets give you the right to attend the concert

Land cannot be stolen unless: part of the land is severed (like stealing a tree), tenants take a fixture or a trustee doesnt pass property on in the way they are legally obligeted to.Wild animals and plants cannot be stolen unless someone takes them under their possession.

Kelly v Lindsay: a corpse is not property unless it has some artistic, medical or educational value

R v Welsh: Bodily fluid can be property. 

Oxford v Moss: information isnt property - looked at exam but didn't take it
R v Akbar: stole and made copies of exam scripts: stole actual paper so guilty 

Whoever has possession and control.

R v turner: took car from garage without paying for the work: garage had a lien against the car and had temporary possession and control

Williams v Phillips: bin men took things from bins: they werent abandoned their ownership had just been transferred

S5 (3)- money recieved under obligation
Davidge v Burnett: given money to pay bills but didnt = theft as not used for designated use

R v Hall: paid deposit for holiday that was lost. Not guilty as they wernt under obligation to do it in a set way

S5 (4) recieved by mistake-
Att. Gen (No1 of 1983)- police woman overpaid- knew but didnt return. Guilty- wasnt here
R v Gilks: got given winnings from the wrong horse didnt say anything- guilty as dishonest 

Dishonestly and Intent to permanently deprive

Very subjective and isnt actually defined by the act

However it does state that you wont be guilty if:

S2 (1)(a)- believed he had a lawful right- e.g. debt

S2 (1)(b)- believed there would be consent for the appropriation R V HOLDEN

S2 (1)(c)- The owner cannot be traced using reasonable steps SMALL

GHOSH TEST:
- ordinary reasonable people thought it to be dishonest
- D was aware it was dishonest by ordinary reasonable standards 

Borrowing is not theft. Borrowing can turn into theft if it is later decided to keep them. E.G. library books or DVDs from blockbusters

DPP v Lavander: swapped doors from 2 council flats - guilty as he treated then as his own.

R v Velumyl: took £1000 and intended to return it later- ruled he would not be able to put back the same notes therefore THAT property was permanently deprived

Lloyd: took movies from theatre copied them and returned them- as they didnt loose any virtue and goodness and was not in a changed state so it wasnt theft