Theft Presentation

1. Theft Presentation

2. Presentation Overview Definition of theft Definition of appropriation Lawrence and consent Morris and adverse usurpation The conflict in the law Gomez and the resolution of the conflict The implications of Gomez The application of Gomez in Hinks Dishonest receipt of a gift is theft Any questions?

4. Definition of Theft and Appropriation Theft is defined in section 1(1) of the Theft Act 1968 as dishonest appropriation of property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it. Appropriation is defined by section 3(1) of the Theft Act 1968 as any assumption by a person of the rights of the owner amounts to appropriation and this includes where he has come by the property (innocently or not) without stealing it, any later assumption of a right to it by keeping it or dealing with it as owner.

5. Case Law Lawrence Morris Gomez Hinks

6. Conflict in the Case Law Lawrence In Lawrence, it was held that the consent of the owner was not a consideratio so whether or not an act was an appropriation had nothing to do with the owners consent. Morris In Morris,the House of Lords did not apply Lawrence. It was held that appropriation was an adverse interference with the rights of the owner. As it was an adverse interference, it followed as a matter of logic that it was something that had not been consented to by the owner because if the owner consented then the interference would not be adverse.

7. Hinks and Gifts R v. Hinks [2000] 3 WLR 1590 It was held that a gift that was valid at civil law could still amount to theft.

8. Any questions?