Dishonestly appropriating that property with the intention to permanently deprive.
2 of 23
What does s3 Theft Act say that appropriation is and what are the leading cases for it?
Assumption of a right of an owner, as in DPP v Gomez and Hinks.
3 of 23
What is property according to s4 of TA?
Money,real property,personal property,things in action and other tangible property.
4 of 23
What did Oxford v Moss establish?
Confidential info contained in an exam paper is not regarded as property under s4.
5 of 23
When will property be regarded as belonging to another under s5?
Property will be regarded as belonging to another where any person has possession,control or any proprietary rights/interests in the property.
6 of 23
What did R v Turner establish?
The appropriation of property belonging to another,even though she owed the property it was temporarily in ownership of the garage therefore appropriating it back amounts to theft.
7 of 23
What did Edwards v Ddin establish?
The AR and MR of theft didn't coincide therefore not guilty of offence.
8 of 23
What did Wain establish?
Appropriation belonging to another s5(3) creates an obligation to account for actual money received or its proceeds.
9 of 23
What did Low v Blease establish?
Electricity doesn't constitute property and therefore can't be stolen.
10 of 23
What did Ricketts and Williams v Phillips establish?
Property that has not been abandoned as the owner has planned what happens next to it is capable of being stolen.
11 of 23
Under s2 when will a person not be regarded as dishonest when they appropriate the property?
If he appropriates the property in a belief he has the law right/the others consent/the property owner can't be discovered by taking reasonable steps.
12 of 23
What did R v Gosh establish?
Further guidance on dishonesty, was what D did dishonest according to ordinary standards of reasonable,honest pep,did D realise RHP would consider it dishonest?
13 of 23
What Did Feely and Sinclair v Neighbour establish?
Dishonest is a question of fact.
14 of 23
What did Rostron establish?
Evidence from the club professional that lost balls belonged to the club was supported by Hibbert v McKiernan [1948]. D knew they were not entitled to go onto the golf course to recover the balls and were dishonest in the Ghosh sense.
15 of 23
What did Llyod establish?
Borrowing property could only amount to "intending to permanently deprive the owner of it" if the intention of the borrower was to return the property in such a changed state that it had lost all its practical value.
16 of 23
What did Marshall establish?
The charge of theft related to the tickets themselves, which were not choses in action. The fact that the tickets might return to the possession of London Underground was irrelevant. The Theft Act 1968 s 6(1) applied. There was intention to PD.
17 of 23
What did Mittchell establish?
There was no intention to permanently deprive and therefore can't be convicted for theft.
18 of 23
What did Chan Man Sin v AG for Hong Kong?
D was guilty of theft of choses in action, i.e. the debts owed by the bank to the companies, there was an intention to PD.
19 of 23
What is the AR of Robbery under s8?
Same AR as theft with the use of force/threatened which is immediately before or at the time.
20 of 23
What is the MR of Robbery under s8?
Same as theft + in order to steal.
21 of 23
What did Dawson & James establish?
The word force is to be given its ordinary meaning and requires no direction to the jury. The jury were entitled to find that force had been used.
22 of 23
What did Clouden establish?
It was held that the force used on the bag was sufficient to amount to force on a person.
23 of 23
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
What is the MR of theft?
Back
Dishonestly appropriating that property with the intention to permanently deprive.
Card 3
Front
What does s3 Theft Act say that appropriation is and what are the leading cases for it?
Comments
No comments have yet been made