Theft Act 1968 (UK Criminal Law)

11 Karteikartenvon einem OutLearn-Studierenden
Diese Karteikarten lernenKostenlos · Spaced Repetition · iPhone, Android, Mac & Web

Alle Karten

1
What statute defines theft, and what is the max sentence?
- Theft Act 1968
- max = 7yrs imprisonment
2
What are the three stages that make up the actus reus of theft?
- appropriation
- property
-belonging to another
(Appropriation of property belonging to another)
3
What are the two stages that make up the Mens Rea of theft?
- dishonesty
- intention to permanently deprive (IPD)
4
What is the definition of appropriation, in statute + case?
- s.3(1) = appropriation is an assumption of the rights of the owner
- Morris case = this can include selling, touching, keeping and swapping price labels
5
What is the definition of property?
- s.4(1) = property includes:
- money
- real property (landuildings)
- personal (moveable items, most things)
- things in action (a right that can be enforced)
- intangible property (money in bank accounts, intellectual property like copyright)
6
Which cases clarify the problems around what is/isn't property?
- confidential information is not property (OXFORD V MOSS)
- however, exam papers are property (R V AKBAR)
- wild animals and plants growing in the wild are NOT property
7
What is the definition of belonging to another?
- s.5(1) = belonging to another means belonging to any person having POSSESSION OR CONTROL of it
8
What are the cases that clarify belonging to another?
- it is possible to steal your own property, if it is in the possession/control of another (R V TURNER)
- if D receives property under an obligation to use it a certain way, and they use it a different way, they can be found guilty of theft (R V MARSHALL, COOMBES AND EREN)
- Receiving property by mistake and not returning it can amount to theft (ATTORNEY GENERAL REFERENCE no.1 of 1983)
9
What is the definition of intention to permanently deprive (IPD)?
- s.6(1) = IPD is defined as intention to treat the thing as his own to dispose of, regardless of the other's rights (DPP V LAVENDER)
10
Which cases clarify IPD?
- If a D has borrowed the items, he is NOT guilty of theft if the "goodness, virtue and practical value of the property" still exists (LLOYD)
- Borrowing MONEY and then returning the same amount is theft, because D will not return the same exact money he took (VELUMYL)
11
How can dishonesty be found? (Not defined in statute)
- Through the Ivey test, est. in Ivey v Genting Casinos (a civil case), and confirmed in Barton and Booth
- The test asks, 'Was the action dishonest according to the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people?'
Alle 11 Karten kostenlos lernen

Mehr Karteikarten: Recht und Politik

Intro P237 KartenRecht und Politik · FranzösischLyneJP SP 31 KartenRecht und Politik · FranzösischLyneunit 1A: american government and politics26 KartenRecht und Politik · EnglischLizetteunit 2B: the presidency19 KartenRecht und Politik · EnglischLizetteFederal Question Jurisdiction14 KartenRecht und Politik · EnglischSamRobbery - Theft Act 19688 KartenRecht und Politik · Englischeinem OutLearn-StudierendenNJ Pharmacy Practice Law309 KartenRecht und Politik · EnglischKennyPhilippine Law: Organ Donation Act (RA 7170)114 KartenRecht und Politik · EnglischCHRISTYCPCU 530: Business Law89 KartenRecht und Politik · EnglischBrandonEasements & Related Interests65 KartenRecht und Politik · EnglischSamChapter 5 Business Law53 KartenRecht und Politik · Englischbevo612Unit 1 Vocab50 KartenRecht und Politik · EnglischAllim

Alle Decks: Recht und Politik

Lerne diese Decks in der App

Kostenlos auf iPhone, Android, Mac und im Web. Füge jedes Deck mit einem Tipp zu deinem Konto hinzu.

Laden im App StoreJetzt bei Google Play
Alle 11 Karten kostenlos lernen