Theft

Front 1

Skipp

Back 1

D assumed the rights of the owner by selling the oranges and onions.

Front 2

Hinks

Back 2

Appropriation can take place with the owner's consent.

Front 3

Morris

Back 3

The act of switching labels either alone or in conjunction with some other act constituted Appropriation.

Front 4

Oxford V Moss

Back 4

Information is not property that can be stolen for the purposes of the Theft act.

Front 5

A V Akbar

Back 5

Exam papers are tangible therefore property.

Front 6

Webster

Back 6

The MOD retained the ownership rights of the medal therefore it Belongs to Another.

Front 7

Turner No. 2

Back 7

The garage was in possession and control of the car so Turner could be guilty of stealing his own car.

Front 8

Davide V Burnnett

Back 8

D was under an obligation to deal with the money to pay the gas bill therefore it was sufficient to establish Belonging to Another under section 5(3).

Front 9

Velumyl

Back 9

D’s intention to pay the money with different notes did not afford V a defence.

Front 10

Lloyd

Back 10

The D did not have intention to permanently deprive as the film reels had not diminished in value.

Front 11

Vinall

Back 11

The D had intention to permanently deprive as they disposed of the bike; it was only sufficient for theft.

Front 12

Ghosh

Back 12

Had the D been dishonest by the standards of a honest, ordinary and reasonable person.

If this answer is yes then did the D realise they were dishonest by those standards.