Possession Nine Tenths of the Law ?

[DaveNewcastle]

Tell me about it! I'm trying to get my head around theft, burglary and robbery at the moment.

Not to stray too far from the OP, it can be particularly interestng to read cases involving discarded property. e.g. Someone places an unwanted item in a rubbish bin, someone else finds it and takes it, the original owner tries to re-claim it.
e.g. an employer instructs an employee to throw something away, the employee keeps it, the employer attempts to claim.
e.g. as above but the employee sells the unwanted item.
e.g. A Person leaves something on common land, someone else takes it and offers it for sale.
e.g. as above but they leave it on the pavement outside a Council rubbish collection point while it is closed.

These subtle permutations can make a lot of difference to the Judgements.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

For the first one Dave, I'd guess that a theft conviction is theoretically possible? I think the property remains under the ownership of the original owner until such time the Council collect it at which point it passes into their ownership?

 

[DaveNewcastle]

For the first one Dave, I'd guess that a theft conviction is theoretically possible? I think the property remains under the ownership of the original owner until such time the Council collect it at which point it passes into their ownership?

I didn't intend to set this up as some sort of test of legal knowledge held in public!
But yes, you are right, and Common Law demonstrates that you're right - well, almost. We would have to be assured that the owner placed the item in their bin with the intention that it was to be collected by the Authority (or its subcontractors). But even that could be contested!

You can imagine some of the variations such as a person placing an item in someone else's bin which is collected by another agency who they couldn't name, or placng an item in a bin which wasn't the item they had intended to have collected. The permutations involving discarded property multiply beyond the scope of Case Law!

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I have to say, when I first started studying theft and the property offences I thought they would be a lot simpler than the Offences against the Person I have been looking at previously. How I was mistaken!

Of course, there are also the statutory dishonesty exemptions to consider: s2(1)(b) and s2(1)(c) being relevant in some of the possible lines of argument.

 

[Tiny Tim]

I can understand that (as previously posted) the BTP have bigger fish to fry than a few bits and pieces sold or swapped by enthusiasts, but many railway magazines contain adverts for large auctions or sales of ex-railway property. Some of this memorabilia is selling for thousands of pounds, and clearly cannot have been acquired legally. I'm not suggesting that these businesses should be prosecuted, but customers should be aware that what they're buying isn't necessarily legit.

I'm also a little surprised at the quantity of certain items offered for sale - station totems being one example. As there is rarely a proper provenance, I wonder how many of them are what they are claimed to be. Enamelled steel signs can be produced (or reproduced) quite cheaply, and would be a nice little earner for anyone unscrupulous enough to pass them off as genuine.

 

[Yew]

Maybe there is even a market for replica ones?

 

[Stewart]

Certainly. The case is R v Turner.

Turner took his car to a garage to be repaired. The repairs were done, and the mechanic parked the car outside the garage. Turner then reappeared and drove the car away without paying. His appropriation of the car was dishonest, and as the garage currently was the current possessor and he did intend to permanently deprive the current possessor of the car he was convicted of theft of his own car.

At the time he took it, it wasn't his car?

 

[the sniper]

Tell me about it! I'm trying to get my head around theft, burglary and robbery at the moment. It's an absolute nightmare!
I find the case law quite interesting though - the Judgment for the substantive and effective entry for burglary in R v Collins is hilarious.

Burglary was the one that got me. I found theft quite fun to learn! Luckily the vast majority of incidents that happen on a day to day basis are rather easy to comprehend and define.