R v Hale
Appropriation is a continuing act, so force used after property is first taken can still be used in order to steal for robbery.
Facts
Mr Hale and an accomplice broke into a woman's house. One of them went upstairs and took her jewellery box, while the other tied her up. They then left with the jewellery box. They were convicted of robbery. They argued that the theft was complete when the jewellery box was picked up, before any force was used, so the force was not used in order to steal.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal upheld the convictions. Eveleigh LJ said that the act of appropriation does not suddenly cease once the property is picked up, but is a continuing act, and it is for the jury to decide whether the act of appropriation was finished at the time force was used. The jury was entitled to find that the theft was continuing when the woman was tied up, so the force was used at the time of and in order to steal.
Related cases on theft, robbery, burglary and fraud
- Attorney General's Reference (No 1 of 1983) [1985] QB 182
- Corcoran v Anderton (1980) 71 Cr App R 104
- Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd [2017] UKSC 67, [2018] AC 391
- Lawrence v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1972] AC 626
- Oxford v Moss (1979) 68 Cr App R 183
- R v Barton and Booth [2020] EWCA Crim 575, [2021] QB 685
- R v Collins [1973] QB 100
- R v Ghosh [1982] QB 1053
Studying criminal law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
