R v Hinks established that theft can occur even when property is validly transferred as a gift under civil law. The House of Lords held that 'appropriation' for theft purposes can include situations where the owner consents to the transfer, fundamentally clarifying the relationship between civil and criminal law concepts of property transfer.

This House of Lords case established that appropriation in theft can occur even with the owner's consent, significantly broadening the scope of the theft offence. The decision resolved conflicting authorities and clarified that any assumption of an owner's rights constitutes appropriation under the Theft Act 1968.

R v Lloyd established the test for determining when temporary deprivation of property constitutes theft under the Theft Act 1968. The case clarified that borrowing property with intent to return it can still amount to theft if the defendant intends to treat the property as their own regardless of the owner's rights.

Held that confidential information cannot be stolen under the Theft Act 1968 as it does not constitute 'property' within the statutory definition. The case involved a student accessing exam questions.

House of Lords established that appropriation in theft can occur even with the owner's consent, and dishonesty is a separate requirement from the act of appropriation.

R v Morris established the definition of theft under the Theft Act 1968, holding that any assumption of any right of the owner constitutes appropriation. The case clarified that switching price labels in a shop amounts to theft even before leaving the premises, as it represents an unauthorized assumption of the owner's rights.

Fiduciaries must account for unauthorized profits despite acting honestly

Court of Appeal case establishing that robbery is a continuing act, meaning the use or threat of force need not occur at the exact moment of appropriation but can occur while the theft is ongoing.

Court of Appeal established that body parts and corpses can constitute property for theft purposes when they acquire different attributes through skill, such as preservation or dissection for medical purposes.

R v Ghosh established the test for dishonesty in criminal law, requiring both objective and subjective elements. The case created a two-stage test that was fundamental to determining dishonesty in fraud and theft cases until the Supreme Court replaced its subjective second limb with a wholly objective test in Ivey v Genting Casinos [2017] UKSC 67.

Property owners cannot claim contributory negligence against injured burglars

Supreme Court revolutionises dishonesty test, abolishing Ghosh's subjective element

Court of Appeal held that a person can steal their own property if another person has a superior right to possession at the relevant time.

Two defendants entered a house with permission but exceeded that permission with intent to steal, establishing the boundaries of trespassory burglary.

Third parties liable for breach of trust through dishonest assistance or knowing receipt

R v Collins established the modern definition of burglary requiring the defendant to enter as a 'trespasser' with knowledge or recklessness as to their trespassory status. The case involved a naked man who climbed through a bedroom window, with the court ruling that entry must be 'effective and substantial' and done knowing one lacks permission.

Trespass for burglary can occur within buildings you're otherwise permitted to enter.

Criminal damage can apply to your own property when others have legal interests.

Bribe proceeds held on constructive trust from moment of receipt by fiduciary

Illegal trust participants can recover property without relying on illegality

Court creates personal remedy against innocent recipients of wrongly distributed estate funds

House of Lords clarifies tracing rules for mixed trust funds

Section 2(1) damages assessed on fraud basis, including all consequential losses.

Acts must be more than merely preparatory to constitute criminal attempts

Face-to-face contracts are voidable for fraud, not void for identity mistake.

Section 423 Insolvency Act 1986 applies to debtor-procured asset transfers by owned companies