Theft or Sharp Practice: Who Cares Now?

4 Pages Posted: 6 Feb 2014 Last revised: 14 Apr 2015

See all articles by A. T. H. Smith

A. T. H. Smith

Victoria University of Wellington, Te Herenga Waka - Faculty of Law; University of Cambridge

Date Written: 2001

Abstract

The House of Lords has upheld, by a majority, the decision of the Court of Appeal in Hinks [2000] 3 W.L.R. 1590 (noted (1999) 58 C.L.J. 10), giving a positive answer to the certified question: “Whether the acquisition of an indefeasible title to property is capable of amounting to an appropriation of property belonging to another for the purposes of section 1(1) of the Theft Act 1968”. The appellant had persuaded a somewhat simple-minded man to make her the “gift” of a quite considerable sum of money. No deception was alleged to have been employed, and so far as the civil law was concerned, the “gift” might well have been a perfectly valid transaction; the question was never determined by the jury, because it was deemed to be irrelevant by the trial judge. But the decision of the House of Lords is to the effect that she was properly convicted of theft however that question might have been answered. So, it would seem, a person may become the indefeasible owner of property and nevertheless be accounted a thief of that very same property, and by the very act of acquiring the ownership of it.

Keywords: Theft Act 1968, Hinks, theft, actus reus, valid gift

JEL Classification: K1, K14

Suggested Citation

Smith, A. T. H., Theft or Sharp Practice: Who Cares Now? (2001). (2001) 60 Cambridge Law Journal at 1, Victoria University of Wellington Legal Research Paper No. 72/2014, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2390902

A. T. H. Smith (Contact Author)

Victoria University of Wellington, Te Herenga Waka - Faculty of Law ( email )

PO Box 600
Wellington, 6140
New Zealand

University of Cambridge ( email )

10 West Road
Cambridge, CB3 9DZ
United Kingdom

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
182
Abstract Views
592
Rank
299,048
PlumX Metrics