Abstract
Property offences are one of the most complex areas of criminal law. It might be thought that the topic should not cause particular difficulty — property offences are less serious than offences against the person, so we need be less concerned about careful gradations of liability. However, there are two particular reasons why this area has caused so many problems.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Bibliography and Further Reading
Elliot: Dishonesty in Theft: a Dispensable Concept, [1982] Criminal Law Review, 395.
Gardner: Appropriation in Theft: the Last Word, (1993) 109 Law Quarterly Review, 195.
Glazebrook: Revising the Theft Acts, [1993] Cambridge Law Journal, 191.
Griew: Dishonesty: The Objections to Feely and Ghosh, (1985) Criminal Law Review„ 341.
Halpin: The Test for Dishonesty, [1996] Criminal Law Review, 283.
Shute and Horder: Thieving and Deceiving: What is the Difference?, (1993) 56 Modern Law Review, 548.
Spencer: The Metamorphosis of s.6, [1977] Criminal Law Review, 653.
Tettenborn: Stealing Information, (1979) 129 New Law Journal, 967.
Williams: Three Rogue Charters, [1980] Criminal Law Review, 263
Williams: Temporary Appropriation Should be Theft, [1981] Criminal Law Review, 129.
Williams: Textbook of Criminal Law (2nd edition, 1983, Stevens) at para. 35.7.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 1998 Marise Cremona and Jonathan Herring
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Herring, J., Cremona, M. (1998). Theft. In: Criminal Law. Macmillan Law Masters. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-13561-5_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-13561-5_11
Publisher Name: Palgrave, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-62075-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-349-13561-5
eBook Packages: Palgrave Social & Cultural Studies CollectionSocial Sciences (R0)