What is the ratio in Lawrence v Metropolitan Police Commissioner?

Appropriation under the Theft Act 1968 can occur even with the owner's consent, as appropriation and dishonesty are separate elements of the offence.

What did the court decide in Lawrence v Metropolitan Police Commissioner?

The House of Lords upheld the theft conviction, ruling that taking money with consent could still constitute appropriation if done dishonestly.

Why is Lawrence v Metropolitan Police Commissioner important for theft law?

It established the fundamental principle that consent does not prevent appropriation, shaping all subsequent theft law and remaining a cornerstone case.

What is the ratio in Lawrence v Metropolitan Police Commissioner?

Appropriation under the Theft Act 1968 can occur even with the owner's consent, as appropriation and dishonesty are separate elements of the offence.

What did the court decide in Lawrence v Metropolitan Police Commissioner?

The House of Lords upheld the theft conviction, ruling that taking money with consent could still constitute appropriation if done dishonestly.

Why is Lawrence v Metropolitan Police Commissioner important for theft law?

It established the fundamental principle that consent does not prevent appropriation, shaping all subsequent theft law and remaining a cornerstone case.

Criminal1 min read

Lawrence v Metropolitan Police Commissioner

[1972] AC 626House of Lords1972

Cite this case in OSCOLA →All Criminal cases →

“Theft can occur even when the victim consents to the taking.”

Facts

Lawrence, a taxi driver, took £6 from an Italian tourist who spoke little English when the correct fare was only £1.50. The passenger had consented to Lawrence taking money from his wallet.

Issues

Whether 'appropriation' under s.1 Theft Act 1968 could occur with the owner's consent, and whether the prosecution needed to prove the taking was without consent.

Held

The House of Lords held that appropriation could occur with the owner's consent. Lawrence's conviction for theft was upheld.

Significance

This landmark decision fundamentally shaped the modern law of theft by establishing that consent does not negate appropriation. It remains central to understanding theft offences and is essential study for criminal law students.

Read the full brief — free

You're reading the free summary of Lawrence v Metropolitan Police Commissioner. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.

Create free account Already have one? Sign in

No card required. Free forever.

OSCOLA Citation

Lawrence v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1972] AC 626 (HL)

Criminal LawTheftAppropriationDishonesty

Read the full judgment elsewhere

Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.

LLBGDLSQE1

More Criminal cases

R v Reece Martin Kelly

[2026] EWCA Crim 268

R v Richard Alexander Welsh

[2026] EWCA Crim 466

R v Robert Michael Thomas

[2026] EWCA Crim 305

This case is reproduced verbatim from the public judgment published by The National Archives under the UK Government's Open Government Licence v3.0. If you appear in this case and believe it should not be published — for example because your conviction was quashed on appeal, you have statutory anonymity, or for other privacy reasons — request removal here.