ABSTRACT
Answer plan This question calls for an analysis of the series of cases concerning liability for theft where D receives property by way of gift. If a person of full capacity makes a gift to another then, in the absence of fraud or coercion, full ownership in the property transfers to the recipient. As the actus reus of theft involves the ‘appropriation of property belonging to another’, it would seem to follow that the recipient could not be guilty of theft even if his behaviour in accepting the gift was, for some reason, morally reprehensible. That was the conclusion reached by the Court of Appeal in Mazo (1997), but not by the House of Lords in Hinks (2000). Other relevant authorities include:
Q&AonCrim inalLaw
• Hopkins and Kendrick (1997); • Lawrence (1982); • Gomez (1993); and • Morris and Anderton v Burnside (1983).
