ABSTRACT
We shall see below that there are other, seemingly arbitrary, categories of things of value which are incapable of being stolen, such as confidential information. On the other hand, it seems that the law is prepared to allow the word ‘other’ to encompass unexpected categories when the courts are of a mind to do so. In AG of Hong Kong v Chan Nai-Keung,212 the defendant was an exporter of textiles from Hong Kong where the export of textiles was prohibited except under licence. Exports were regulated by a quota system, and since many exporters were unable to meet their target quota, there was a lucrative internal market in selling these surplus quotas. The wording of the law of theft in Hong Kong was virtually identical to s 4 of the TA 1968 and D was convicted of theft when he sold his company’s surplus export quotas at a gross undervalue to another company in which he had a personal interest. It was held that the quotas were not ‘things in action’, but were, nevertheless, transferable for value and could be regarded as ‘other intangible property’.
