Ricketts v Basildon Magistrates' Court [2010] EWHC 2358 (Adm...

Facts

• Mr. Ricketts was apprehended after collecting bags of items left outside a charity shop and taking items from bins behind the same shop.
• During a police interview, Ricketts admitted he intended to sell the items.
• He was charged with theft under the Theft Act 1968 and the Magistrates’ Court committed the case to Crown Court.
• Ricketts sought judicial review in the High Court, arguing that the items were abandoned property and thus did not legally belong to another when appropriated.
• The appeal against the magistrates’ decision centered on whether the items at the time of removal could be considered as "belonging to another" under the Theft Act 1968.

Issues

1. Whether items left outside the charity shop or placed in bins were abandoned or still "belonged to another" for the purposes of Section 5(1) of the Theft Act 1968.
2. Whether the magistrates were correct in concluding there was sufficient evidence of theft under the Act.

Decision

• The High Court held that the magistrates correctly committed the case for trial.
• For items left outside the shop, the court found donors retained ownership until the charity accepted the gift, as placing the items outside the shop was an offer of a gift.
• During the interim period before acceptance by the charity, ownership remained with the donor, satisfying the "belonging to another" element.
• Regarding items in bins, the court held that proximity and control associated with the bins indicated ongoing ownership and control by the charity (or donor), and thus the property still belonged to another.
• The court determined that mere placement near or in bins associated with the charity did not automatically constitute abandonment.

Legal Principles

• Under Section 1(1) and Section 5(1) of the Theft Act 1968, property is regarded as "belonging to another" if anyone has possession or control of it.
• The intention of donors, inferred from the act of leaving items outside the charity shop, is important in establishing when ownership is transferred.
• Property is not necessarily abandoned by being placed outside or in bins if there is evidence of continuing control or intended transfer.
• Courts must infer ownership and control from the circumstances and the intentions of parties involved in disposing of the property.

Conclusion

The High Court clarified that for theft under the Theft Act 1968, objects left outside a charity shop or in its bins are not automatically abandoned; ownership may remain with the donor or charity until a transfer or disposal is complete, and thus the element of “belonging to another” is satisfied if there is ongoing intention or control over the property.