... it became his property or belonged to another and the person is considered to be dishonest in accepting the property. The decision of the House of Lords was based on 2 cases DPP v Gomez [1993] A.C.442 and Lawrence v M.P.C.[1972] A.C.626 In both of those cases the consent of the owner has been obtained by deception. In Gomez, the title the defendant obtained to the property by means of a false representation he took from the shop was voidable to the deception, the same applied in Lawrence. In Hinks, the majority of judges took the view that judgments in Lawrence and Gomez "did not differentiate between cases of consent induced by fraud and consent given in any other circumstances"(Lord Steyn) and that it is irrelevant whether the act was done with the owner's authority or consent. As a result, there are several conclusions that can be drawn from Hinks ...

See this essay or coursework document in full right now