R v Lawrence [1972]
![R v Lawrence [1972]](https://images.unsplash.com/photo-1624807806624-dd74b21e717a?crop=entropy&cs=tinysrgb&fit=max&fm=jpg&ixid=M3wxMTc3M3wwfDF8c2VhcmNofDN8fHRheGklMjBkcml2ZXJ8ZW58MHx8fHwxNzIyNTM2NDEwfDA&ixlib=rb-4.0.3&q=80&w=1200)
1. Facts:
• Scenario: A taxi driver, after a ride, took more money from a tourist than required. The tourist opened his wallet to pay, but the driver took more than the agreed fare.
• Issue: Whether the driver's action constituted theft despite having the owner's consent to take money.
2. Outcome:
• Decision: The driver was convicted of theft. The court ruled that the driver’s action of taking more money than required constituted theft, as the consent of the owner (the tourist) did not extend to the excess amount taken.
3. Impact and Analysis:
• Removal of ‘Consent’ Requirement: The case highlighted issues stemming from the 1916 Act's removal of the requirement for theft that it must be ‘without the consent of the owner.’ This legislative change led to a blurring of lines between theft and certain crimes of deception, raising concerns about the different moral foundations of these crimes.