A Certain Sense of Belonging?
| Author | Mitchell Davies |
| DOI | 10.1177/002201839205600206 |
| Published date | 01 May 1992 |
| Date | 01 May 1992 |
| Subject Matter | Comment |
A
CERTAIN
SENSE
OF
BELONGING?
Afrequent matter before the courts recently has been the thorny problem
of construing ss 3 and 5 of the Theft Act 1968, which, together with s 4,
provide the definitional provisions pertaining to the actus reus of the
s 1(1) theft offence. The avowed purpose of the Criminal Law Revision
Committee in formulating their report (Cmnd 2977) which was presented
to Parliament in May 1966 was to achieve a 'simpler and more effective
system of law'. The draft Bill, which had been appended to the Report,
substantially became the 1968Act which jettisoned much of the technicality
which had beset the law of stealing under the Larceny Acts of
1861
and
1916.
The requirement under s 1(1) that the property must belong to another
must be read in conjunction with s 5 of the Act. This latter section
catalogues the circumstances when property will be deemed legally to
continue to belong to V in circumstances where, this section apart,
ownership would appear to have passed to D. This section clearly advances
the boundaries of 'ownership' under the previous law and has spawned a
frenzy of judicial activity where subtle nuances and refinements in the law
have abounded. The evident need for so many judicial pronouncements
would seem to serve as a strong indicator that, at least in this regard, the
objectives of the Criminal Law Revision Committee remain unfulfilled.
Section 5(1) of the Theft Act provides:
Property shall be regarded as belonging to any person having possession or
control of it, or having in it any proprietary right or interest
...
The width of that subsection, particularly with regard to its reference to
'proprietary right or interest', probably renders unnecessary the specific
cases of where property will belong to another which are to be found in
s5(2)-(5). The inclusion of these subsections must accordingly be viewed
as an
attemptto
clarify the law; it is unfortunate therefore that most
difficulty of interpretation has been encountered with reference to s 5(3)
and 5(4).
This article is specifically concerned with s 5(3) which states:
Where a person receives property from or on account of another, and is under
an obligation to the other to retain and deal with that property or its proceeds
in a particular way, the property or proceeds shall be regarded (as against
him) as belonging to the other.
To commence this analysis of the subsection from a point of certainty,
it is clear that s 5(3) deems property to continue to belong to V in two
distinct situations:
(a) Where the property is received from another--eg V gives D £50 to
pay her share of the gas bill. When D applies the money to her own
purposes, always providing she has the requisite mens rea, she will be
guilty of the theft of the money from V. See Davidge v Bunnett
[1984J
Crim LR 296; and
(b) Where the property is received 'on account of another'--eg X gives
D £100 to be applied to the benefit of V. When D absconds with the
money, with the required mens rea, he will be guilty of the theft of
the money from V. See Lewis v Lethbridge
[1987J
Crim LR 59.
175
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting