Skip to main content

Previous

Could Tess of the d’Urbervilles plead loss of control?

Next

10 years of law

Judges, jurors and dishonesty

The Theft Act 1968 provides no definition of dishonesty. Giles Bayliss asks why this approach has been criticised and why subsequent cases have sought to provide guidance on the meaning of dishonesty

This article is relevant for AQA Law 04 (Concepts Balancing Interests, Morality and Fault, and Theft); OCR A2 Unit G153: Criminal Law Theft and WJEC LA4 Option 2: Criminal Law and Justice Mens Rea.

In 1966 a Criminal Law Revision Committee (CLRC) report decided that the term ‘dishonesty’ is easily understood by ordinary people, and it can be left to a jury to determine without any explanation by the judge.

Your organisation does not have access to this article.

Sign up today to give your students the edge they need to achieve their best grades with subject expertise

Subscribe

Previous

Could Tess of the d’Urbervilles plead loss of control?

Next

10 years of law

Related articles: