597749
Theft AO2
- Appropriation
- Width
- Wide variety of acts considered as appropriation
- Morris - courts interpreted the act as the assumption of any of the
rights. However, the act reads 'any assumption of the rights of an owner'
- Have the courts gone beyond the intention of Parliament?
- Have the courts gone beyond the intention of Parliament?
- Proof of dishonesty
is now the only
distinguishing
factor between theft
and an honest
appropriation
- Wide variety of acts considered as appropriation
- Assumption at one point in time
- Effect of the
decision in Gomez
- Led to acquittal of
Atakpu and Abrahams
- Still assuming
the rights of an
owner by
continuing to drive
the cars and
bringing them into
the country
- Surely more sensible to say the
appropriation is a continuing act
- The courts have taken this view for burglary
through Hale (1979) and Lockley (1995)
- The courts have taken this view for burglary
through Hale (1979) and Lockley (1995)
- Surely more sensible to say the
appropriation is a continuing act
- Still assuming
the rights of an
owner by
continuing to drive
the cars and
bringing them into
the country
- Led to acquittal of
Atakpu and Abrahams
- Effect of the
decision in Gomez
- Consent
- Can be appropriation
even though the
owner has consented
- Particularly odd in relation to items
in a shop - Lord Roskills view in
Morris seems to be appropriate
- Where the owner consents through a false statement it seems
more appropriate to charge under the Fraud Act 2006. Cases
prior to 2006 could be charged under the old offence of
obtaining property by deception under s15 of the Theft Act 1968
- Particularly odd in relation to items
in a shop - Lord Roskills view in
Morris seems to be appropriate
- Theft of gifts
- D can assume the rights of an
owner when the property has
actually been given to them
- D can assume the rights of an
owner when the property has
actually been given to them
- Can be appropriation
even though the
owner has consented
- Civil v Criminal
- Hinks puts the two in conflict
- Civil law on gifts involves conduct by the owner who
transfers the ownership of the gift to the donee. Once
this is done the gift is the property of the donee
- Civil law on gifts involves conduct by the owner who
transfers the ownership of the gift to the donee. Once
this is done the gift is the property of the donee
- Hinks puts the two in conflict
- It is important that all law should be
as clear and certain as possible.
Especially offences which have a
prison term as this considers the civil
liberties of the D and those which
have a social stigma such as theft
- Width
- Property
- S4 hasn't really
caused any issues
- S4 hasn't really
caused any issues
- Belonging to another
- Wide definition so it is
easy for the prosecution
to prove V was the owner
- Turner - The garage had a lien to the car. It could be held that this gave
the garage control but the trial judge directed the jury to ignore the issue
of a lien and on appeal the judges based the decision to uphold the
conviction on the fact that the garage had possession and control. If the
issue of lien is ignored then D had a right to take the car back
- Turner - The garage had a lien to the car. It could be held that this gave
the garage control but the trial judge directed the jury to ignore the issue
of a lien and on appeal the judges based the decision to uphold the
conviction on the fact that the garage had possession and control. If the
issue of lien is ignored then D had a right to take the car back
- Wide definition so it is
easy for the prosecution
to prove V was the owner
- Dishonesty
- Criticisms of Ghosh test
- Leaves too much to the jury
- Risks inconsistency
- Better if it was a point of law?
- Overlooks the fact that the jury needs to
decide whether they believe D's testimony
- Overlooks the fact that the jury needs to
decide whether they believe D's testimony
- Better if it was a point of law?
- Risks inconsistency
- Too much emphasis on objective views
- The first stage has the odd effect that if the jury thinks it
is not dishonest D will not be found guilty even though
he may have thought he was being dishonest
- The first stage has the odd effect that if the jury thinks it
is not dishonest D will not be found guilty even though
he may have thought he was being dishonest
- Professor Griew (1985 Article)
- Longer trials due to complicated nature of the test
- ↑ Ds might decide to plead not guilty in the hope that
a jury would decide their behaviour wasn't dishonest
- ↑ Ds might decide to plead not guilty in the hope that
a jury would decide their behaviour wasn't dishonest
- Fiction of community standards
- Assumes a common standard
- But society is diverse
- But society is diverse and different
sections may have different standards
- Supported by LC (R) on fraud in 2002 - 'people's
moral standards are surprisingly varied'
- DPP v Gohill and another (2007)
- Acquitted as magistrates were
not satisfied be reasonable doubt
that by the ordinary standards of
reasonable and honest people
the Ds had acted dishonestly
- Acquitted as magistrates were
not satisfied be reasonable doubt
that by the ordinary standards of
reasonable and honest people
the Ds had acted dishonestly
- DPP v Gohill and another (2007)
- Finch and Fafinsky of Brunel University in 2009 conduct
research online by asking people whether they thought
that the examples they gave were dishonest or not. The
views of the respondents varied enormously
- Supported by LC (R) on fraud in 2002 - 'people's
moral standards are surprisingly varied'
- But society is diverse and different
sections may have different standards
- But society is diverse
- Assumes a common standard
- Even more difficult to
apply to specialised cases
- Longer trials due to complicated nature of the test
- Leaves too much to the jury
- Criticisms of Ghosh test
- Intention to permanently deprive
- Is it necessary?
- Does it matter?
- If not included Lloyd
could've been convicted
- If not included Lloyd
could've been convicted
- Does it matter?
- Because of this need there is a
separate offence under the act of
taking vehicles without consent
- Conditional intent
- Easom
- If permanent was
replaced with temporary
such cases could lead
to convictions
- Bring it in line with the law on burglary where the courts have
ruled that conditional intent is sufficient for burglary under s9(1)(a)
- Bring it in line with the law on burglary where the courts have
ruled that conditional intent is sufficient for burglary under s9(1)(a)
- Easom
- Is it necessary?
Want to create your own Mind Maps for free with GoConqr? Learn more.