levo

Criminal Law: Property Offences

Theft: dishonesty

  • 3 things to know
  • Components 2 and 3

Overview

The three situations in section 2(1) that are not dishonest, the irrelevance of a willingness to pay, and the objective test the Supreme Court settled in Ivey v Genting Casinos in place of Ghosh.

What you need to know

Answer each one before you reveal it.

Your recallNot started
Numbers

Is dishonesty defined in the Theft Act 1968?

Key term

State the first situation in section 2(1) that is not dishonest.

Key term

State the second situation in section 2(1) that is not dishonest.

Questions from this subtopic

Each one with the model answer underneath.

  1. 1

    Is dishonesty defined in the Theft Act 1968?

    Model answer

    The Theft Act 1968 gives no positive definition of dishonesty. Section 2(1) instead lists three situations that are not dishonest.

  2. 2

    State the first situation in section 2(1) that is not dishonest.

    Model answer

    A defendant is not dishonest who appropriates in the belief of a legal right to deprive the other of the property. The belief need not be reasonable, only genuine.

  3. 3

    State the second situation in section 2(1) that is not dishonest.

    Model answer

    A defendant is not dishonest who believes the owner would consent if the owner knew of the appropriation and the circumstances. Borrowing from a friend who would not mind is the everyday example.

  4. 4

    State the third situation in section 2(1) that is not dishonest.

    Model answer

    A defendant is not dishonest who believes the owner cannot be discovered by taking reasonable steps. Finding money in the street may fall within this provision.

  5. 5

    Does a willingness to pay prevent a finding of dishonesty?

    Model answer

    Section 2(2) provides that an appropriation may be dishonest even where the defendant is willing to pay. Taking goods and leaving the money behind can still be theft.

  6. 6

    Which case set out the two-stage test of dishonesty applied until 2017?

    Model answer

    R v Ghosh [1982] asked first whether the conduct was dishonest by the standards of ordinary decent people. The second stage asked whether the defendant realised ordinary people would regard it as dishonest.

Other ways to work this

The same content, four other ways.

What is inside Levo

Six ways to work the same material.

1Closed book
2Open book
3Closed book

The 3-step method, run for you

Answer cold, learn it, then prove it stuck. Levo tracks the jump between your first attempt and your last.

Parliamentary and European Law Making
Delegated Legislation
Statutory Interpretation
Judicial Precedent

Cram a whole paper in one sitting

Sort every topic into what you know and what you do not, then drill only the weak ones.

The court sits in .
StrasbourgLondonParis

Blank Blitz makes facts automatic

Rapid timed gap-fills on the terms and numbers you need to recall without thinking.

AAn interim injunction restrains publication before trial.
BPublication cannot be undone.
CAn injunction may be the only effective remedy.

Build It gets the exam shape right

Assemble a full-mark answer from its marking points, in the order an examiner wants them.

A Public Bill changes the general law.
TrueFalse

Test It catches misconceptions

Spot the fault in a statement. The traps are the mistakes students actually make.

721941163128510

Brain Breaks between sessions

Short focus games to reset attention, so the next set lands better than the last.

Every question in Criminal Law: Property Offences, on a schedule.

Attempt a question from memory, write the correct version, then attempt it again. Levo records the jump between your first attempt and your last, and brings each question back on the day you are due to forget it.

Or £46 a year, about £3.83 a month. Cancel anytime.