... in Gomez the Law Lords came to a very wide, perhaps too wide definition, saying that it was help to mean an assumption of any of the rights of the owner, even if the owner consents. There for if D takes an item from a shop shelf with the intention to avoid payment but before doing so his conscience kicks in and he puts it back he puts it back. In this case he will still be found guilt although technically they have not stolen anything. However according to Hinks consent of the owner is irrelevant, causing a conflict between civil and criminal law. Because of this even a person who accepts a gift can be treated as appropriating property belonging to another. Possible reform for this may be to follow the civil case of Mazo where the courts held that no theft could take place if a valid gift had ...

See this essay or coursework document in full right now