Criminal Law: Liability of Matilda and Sam

Running head: CRIMINAL LAW
Criminal Law
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1CRIMINAL LAW
Table of Contents
Criminal Liability of Matilda towards Daisy...................................................................................2
Issue.............................................................................................................................................2
Rules............................................................................................................................................2
Application..................................................................................................................................3
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................4
Criminal Liability of Sam towards Matilda.....................................................................................5
Issue.............................................................................................................................................5
Rules............................................................................................................................................5
Application..................................................................................................................................6
Conclusion...................................................................................................................................8
Footnotes..........................................................................................................................................9
Bibliography..................................................................................................................................11

2CRIMINAL LAW
Criminal Liability of Matilda towards Daisy
Issue
Whether Matilda has criminally liability against Daisy
Rules
Basic larceny
It is defined under the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)1. Any person, who takes and carries away
anything without the consent of the owner of such thing, amounts to larceny. Such person must
carry or take such thing away fraudulently and without any rights made in good faith, which is
capable of being stolen with intent and permanently deprives the owner from such thing at the
time of taking or carrying away such thing.
The term larceny can be defining in various ways, which includes the larceny by mistake,
larceny by finding, larceny by a trick. Larceny by trick is defined as the possession of any
property without the authorization of the owner and obtaining possession of the property with the
false statement of the victim as was observed in Ward (1938)2
The essential elements of larceny include the following:
Actus Reus (physical elements)
 Under the subsection (a) the Actus Reus is defined where the property capable of being
stolen which is defined in the case of R vs. Daley (1879)3. When the property belongs to
1 Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
2 Ward (1938) 38 SR (NSW) 308
3 R vs. Daley (1879) 12 SCR (NSW) 151

3CRIMINAL LAW
another and it was taken away without consent, then it will be punishable under larceny
as was held in the cases of Kelly (1999)4 and Croton (1967)5
 Appropriation refers to a physical act involving a element of adverse interference with
the rights of the owner. The usurpation of rights of the owner without consent is another
important element under larceny, which has been defined in the cases of Kolosque vs.
Miyazaki (1995)6 and Wallis vs. Lane [1964]7.
Mens Rea (Mental Elements)
 It refers to the guilty mind of a person to be involved in a criminal offence. In Foster
(1967)8 and Minigall vs. McCammon [1970] the accused had the intention to deprive
the owner permanently.
 The dishonestly or fraudulence element mentioned under section 4B of Crimes Act which
includes the honest belief or claim of rights has been found in Peters (1998)9 and
Lopatta (1983)10.
Application
On the facts here, it can be stated that Matilda has failed to provide appropriate service to
Daisy. She assured her to provide her perfect match as per her requirement. However, she
concealed the present situation of her business and about the ongoing investigation being
conducted under the NSW Fair Trading. As per the given scenario, Matilda has committed fraud
4 Kelly (1999) QB 621; [1998] 3 ALL ER 741 Para 50
5 Croton (1967) 117 CLR 326 (at p329)
6 Kolosque vs. Miyazaki (1995) NSWSC
7 Wallis vs. Lane [1964] VR 293
8 Foster (1967) 118 CLR 117 (at p119)
9 Peters (1998) 192 CLR 493; 151 ALR 51 at 317
10Lopatta (1983) 35 SASR 101 at 107