- Published on
KembaraXtra-Case Law-Gomez (1992) HL
Citation: Gomez [1992] UKHL 6
Core Issue: Appropriation under the Theft Act 1968, specifically the relevance of consent in determining appropriation.
Facts:
Citation: Gomez [1992] UKHL 6
Core Issue: Appropriation under the Theft Act 1968, specifically the relevance of consent in determining appropriation.
Facts:
- Defendant (D): Assistant at an electrical shop.
- Transaction: D supplied goods to B in exchange for stolen building society cheques.
- Knowledge: D knew the cheques were stolen.
- Authority: D obtained authorization from the shop manager to supply the goods, but did not disclose that the cheques were stolen.
- Initial Outcome: D was convicted of theft.
- Appeal History:
- Court of Appeal: Allowed D's appeal (reason: no appropriation due to manager's authority).
- House of Lords: Prosecution appealed.
- D was found guilty and appropriation was deemed to have taken place.
- The consent (or authorization) of the owner (shop manager) is irrelevant in determining whether an appropriation has occurred.
- Lawrence [1972] AC 626 was confirmed as the leading authority on appropriation.
- Appropriation includes adverse interference with or usurpation of the owner's rights.
- However, this is not the exclusive definition of appropriation.
- An act expressly or impliedly authorized by the owner can still amount to an appropriation.
- The Morris [1984] AC 320 decision was correct, but its statement that expressly or impliedly authorised acts can never amount to appropriation was erroneous and unnecessary.
- Consent is Irrelevant: Gomez definitively establishes that the victim's consent does not negate appropriation.
- Broad Definition of Appropriation: Gomez confirms a broad interpretation of appropriation. Any assumption of the rights of the owner can constitute appropriation, regardless of consent.
- Rejection of Morris: Gomez clarifies and refines the Morris decision, specifically rejecting the notion that authorized acts can never be appropriation.
- Focus on Defendant's Actions: The focus is on the defendant's actions in assuming the rights of the owner, even if those actions are seemingly authorized.
- Dishonesty is Key: While appropriation can occur even with consent, the element of dishonesty is still necessary for a conviction of theft. D knew the cheques were stolen.
0 Comments