Theft Act 1968

Robbery

Theft

S 1 .Guilty of theft if dishonestly appropriates , with intention to permanently deprive the other of it

Actus Reus

  1. Appropriation
  1. Property
  1. Belonging to another

Defendant physically taken object from owner

Doing something with property that owner that they don't have the right to do

R v Morris - Defendant switched price of two products , didn't leave with product but putting in his trolley considered appropriation

Section 3(1) Appropriation - Can happen where someone doesn't steal , e.g someone decided to keep something they were lent

Appropriation can take place if victim consents to item being taken (Lawrence v MPC) 🇮🇹

Includes money , all other property , intangible property

Oxford v Moss - Seeing unopened exam questions weren't theft since they were information not property

Electricity treated separately as its considered intangible that can't be stolen

But if person dishonestly uses electricity without authority and dishonestly causes it to be diverted or wasted can we guity

Means belonging to any person having possession , control or having any proprietary interest

Includes where person owns property but also possession

E.g Someone's takes suit that was rented to that person , they are still liable of stealing from that person even though it was rented

Mens Rea

Intention to permanently deprive

Dishonesty

Person guilty of robbery of he steals and immediately before , uses force on any person

Similar to theft but with force

Indictable Offence

Maximum life imprisonment

Actus Reus

  1. Must have Theft
  1. Intentional force
  1. Force used immediately before/during theft
  1. On any Person

All elements of theft must be present for robbery

Element missing = No robbery

R v Robinson (1977) - Defendant owed £5 by friend he was fighting , £5 dropped out of friend pocket , defendant picked up

Acquitted as defendant owed £5

Can include small amount of force

Confirmed in Dawson v James (1976) and R v Clouden (1987)

Sufficient force is for the jury to decide

Clouden - Defedent wrenched shopping bag from woman's grip

Didn't physically touch but held force used to grab bag was enough to count for force

However in P V DPP (2012) - Confirmed snatching cigarette wasn't force

R Hale (1979)

Two men forced way into woman's house , one put hand over woman's mouth while other went upstairs . After stealing jewellery tied woman up

Putting hand over mouth considered force , tying up was a continuing action constituting force

Theft doesn't need to happen on person being threatened

E.g - Hostages in a bank robbery

Mens Rea

Same as theft - (Dishonesty and intention to permanently deprive the other of property)

Plus intention to use force to steal

R v Velumyl (1989) - Defendant took money from employers safe with intention of repaying it next Monday , but found out before then and defendant convicted , despite intending to return them

Burglary

Triable either way

Maximum 14 years

click to edit