Key Facts
- •Mohammed Abdi Mahmud convicted of robbery at Isleworth Crown Court on July 2, 2021.
- •Incident involved a mobile phone taken from Mr. Mussa, known to Mahmud from the Somali community.
- •Mahmud claimed Mr. Mussa owed him money for a previously sold phone, and that the incident was a result of Mussa's aggression.
- •CCTV evidence contradicted Mahmud's claim that Mussa freely gave him the phone.
- •Mahmud maintained he believed the phone he took was his, even though it was not the same phone he'd sold to Mussa.
Legal Principles
Theft requires dishonest appropriation of property belonging to another with intent to permanently deprive.
Theft Act 1968, Section 1
'Property' belonging to another includes anything in possession or control of another, or in which another has a proprietary interest.
Theft Act 1968, Section 5(1)
A claim of right negates dishonesty if the defendant genuinely believes they have a legal right to deprive another of property.
Theft Act 1968, Section 2(1)(a)
The Ivey test for dishonesty: 1. Subjective belief of the defendant; 2. Objective standard of ordinary decent people.
Ivey v Genting Casinos [2017] UKSC 67
A separate direction on the claim of right is only necessary if it adds materially to the dishonesty direction.
R v Matthews-Williams [2023] EWCA Crim 1486
In a sale of goods, property usually passes at the point of sale.
Sale of Goods Act 1979, Section 18
Outcomes
Appeal granted, conviction quashed.
The judge's directions to the jury regarding the claim of right defence were inadequate and potentially misleading, rendering the conviction unsafe.