“House of Lords rules theft can occur even with owner's consent”
Gomez, an assistant manager at an electrical goods shop, persuaded his manager to accept two stolen building society cheques in exchange for goods worth £16,000. The manager was deceived into believing the cheques were valid and consented to the transaction.
Whether appropriation under section 1 of the Theft Act 1968 can occur where the owner consents to the taking of property, even if that consent was obtained by fraud.
The House of Lords held that appropriation can occur even where the owner consents to the defendant's acts. Any assumption of the rights of an owner amounts to appropriation, regardless of whether it is done with or without the owner's consent.
This decision significantly expanded the scope of theft by establishing that consensual transactions can constitute theft if other elements are present. It remains the leading authority on appropriation in English criminal law.
You're reading the free summary of R v Gomez. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.
No card required. Free forever.
OSCOLA Citation
R v Gomez [1993] AC 442 (HL)
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Falls back to Google for old citations BAILII catalogues separately
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.