• Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

Card Range To Study

through

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/32

Click to flip

Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;

Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;

H to show hint;

A reads text to speech;

32 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
Assuming the rights of an owner; acquiring legally and later assuming or dealing as an owner
TA68, s3(1)
Consent is irrelevant to appropriation
DPP v Gomez
You only need to assume one right
R v Morris
A valid gift can be an appropriation – it is a very neutral word
R v Hinks
The appropriation requires some personal contact or interference with the property, not just causing victim to use it in a way that benefits D
R v Briggs
Can't steal more than once, but appropriation can be continuous or instantaneous
R v Atakpu
TA68, s3(2)
Not an appropriation for TA if:
i. You purchase for value
ii. You act in good faith (eg don't buy at dodgy cheap price)
Watch out for discovering a gift is stolen!
Money, real, personal, things in action, other intangible property
TA68, s4(1)
Things in action: intangible rights capable of legal enforcement – bank account balance, agreed overdraft
Chan Man-Sin v R
Overdrawing agreed OD is not appropriating thing in action (but see Fraud Act)
R v Navvabi
You can't steal land unless
TA68, 4(2)

- fiduciary acting in breach
- someone not in possession severing fixtures
- tenants who appropriate things let with the property
Wild plants if picked for commercial purpose
TA68, s 4(3)
Wild animals if normally captive of being/been reduced to possession
TA68, s4(4)
Property is not:
- Reading confidential information
Oxford v Moss
Property is not:
- Swiping electricity
Low v Blease
Low v Blease
R v Turner (no 2)
The property must belong to another at the time of the dishonest appropriation (ie not be a petrol station/restaurant case)
Edwards v Ddin
Where you get property from another and have a LEGAL obligation to deal in a certain way, as against you it belongs to another
TA68, s5(3)

DPP v Huskinson
can't be just contractual, has to be an obligation to deal with THAT
property (or proceeds)
R v Hall
GHOSH test (any crime with dishonesty MR):
R v Ghosh

i. Did D do something that is dishonest by the standard of ordinary, honest people?
ii. Did D know his action was dishonest by such standards?
With taking cash, you intend to permanently deprive even if you intend to repay (due to exact notes and coins)
R v Velumyl
If you take without permanent intent you are still regarded as doing so if (rarely used):
TA68, s6(1)

i. If you you intend to dispose as you please regardless of other's rights
ii. Can include borrowing if circumstances make it equivalent to outright taking or disposal
Taken item offered back to buy is intention permanently to D
R v Raphael
Selling used underground tickets “disposing of regardless of rights”
R v Marshall
Stole correctly believing bank would reimburse company – this is also disposing of thing regardless of owner's right
Chan Man-sin v R
You can treat borrowing as ItPD if:
R v Lloyd

a. It is equivalent to outright taking or;
b. Returned thing is “spent” or “goodness is gone”
ItPD also inferred where you part with thing under conditions as to its return which you may not be able to perform
TA68, 6(2)
Knowledge that payment on the spot is required
i. It can be a defence if D has agreed with V he will pay later
R v Vincent
Intention to avoid payment
- not liable if you intend to return and pay
R v Allen
Supply of goods or services unless:
i. Supply contrary to law
ii. Payment not legally enforceable
TA78, s3(3)
Use of credit cards eceeding limit is a representation
R v Lambie
Home office guidance on misleading
less than wholly true and capable of interpretation to the detriment of the victim