Criminal Law: Theft Under the Theft Act 1968

Section 1 of the Theft Act 1968 defines theft as dishonestly appropriating property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it. That single sentence hides five separate elements: three in the actus reus and two in the mens rea. Each must be proved.

1. Appropriation (s.3)

Appropriation is any assumption of the rights of an owner. It does not require dishonesty by itself, and it can happen even where the owner consents to the taking.

2. Property and Belonging to Another (s.4 and s.5)

Property includes money and personal property (s.4), with limited exceptions such as land and wild plants. Property belongs to another if that person has possession, control, or a proprietary right or interest (s.5). Note that you can steal property you own if another person has a superior interest in it at the time.

3. Dishonesty (s.2 and the Ivey test)

Section 2 lists situations that are not dishonest, for example a genuine belief in a legal right to the property. Beyond those, the test for dishonesty is now objective.

The Court of Appeal confirmed in Barton and Booth v R [2020] that the Ivey approach applies to criminal cases, so the second, subjective limb of Ghosh is no longer good law.

4. Intention to Permanently Deprive (s.6)

The prosecution must prove an intention to permanently deprive. Borrowing is usually not theft, unless it is for a period and in circumstances equivalent to an outright taking, for example returning a season ticket only once it is spent.

5. Worked Example

APPROPRIATION: The cashier assumes the rights of the owner over the goods, and consent obtained in these circumstances does not prevent an appropriation (Gomez). PROPERTY BELONGING TO ANOTHER: the goods belong to the shop. DISHONESTY: applying Ivey, ordinary people would regard deliberately under-charging a friend as dishonest. INTENTION TO PERMANENTLY DEPRIVE: the friend is meant to keep the goods.

CONCLUSION: all five elements are satisfied, so the cashier is likely guilty of theft.

Examiner Insights

Conclusion

Theft is a five-element offence. Work through appropriation, property, belonging to another, dishonesty and intention to permanently deprive in order, anchoring each to its section and case, and the analysis stays clean under pressure.