R v Robinson
A defendant who honestly believes he has a legal right to property is not guilty of theft, and so not guilty of robbery, even if he uses force.
Facts
Mr Robinson was owed £7 by the victim's wife. He approached the victim in the street and, during a fight, the victim dropped a £5 note, which Mr Robinson took. He claimed that he was taking money he was owed. He was convicted of robbery, after the judge directed the jury that he had to honestly believe he was entitled to get the money in the way he did.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal quashed the conviction. Under section 2(1)(a) of the Theft Act 1968, a person is not dishonest if he appropriates property in the belief that he has in law the right to deprive the other of it. Mr Robinson only had to show an honest belief that he was entitled to the money, not that he was entitled to use force to get it. Since there was no theft, there could be no robbery, which requires a theft.
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.
