Making off without payment

Background Original theft Act had a loophole that was found and exploited Loophole was that the AR and MR did not need to coincide – Greenburg (1972) Parliament created a new Theft Act (1978) Max sentence = 2 years Actus Reus Mens Rea Makes off Dishonesty Supplied goods Knowing payment was required On the spot Intended to permanently avoid payment Did not pay

Actus Reus #1; Makes off McDavitt (1981) D went to the toilet on the premises and thus did not make off

Actus Reus #2; goods/services suplied Troughton (1987) Service had not been provided

Actus Reus #3 “payment on the spot” Vincent (2001) There was no expectation that D would have to pay his bill at the checkout

Actus reus #4; did not pay Question of fact for the jury

Mens Rea #1; Dishonesty Ghosh Test – Lord Justice Lane Was D’s act dishonest according to the standards of the reasonable and honest person? If so 2. Did D realise that reasonable and honest people would regard the act as being dishonest?

Mens Rea #2- knowing payment was due on the spot Vincent (2001) There was no expectation that D would have to pay his bill at the checkout

Mens Rea #3; D intended to avoid payment permanently Allen (1985) Prosecutor needs to prove that D had the intention to not pay at all