Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The two-pronged definition of fraudulent conversion is "conversion [n 1] that is committed by the use of fraud, either by obtaining the property, or in withholding it". [1] In England and Wales, the term fraudulent conversion was superseded by the identically named offences under the Larceny Act 1901 and sections 20 and 21 of the Larceny Act 1916.
Conversion is an intentional tort consisting of "taking with the intent of exercising over the chattel an ownership inconsistent with the real owner's right of possession". [1] In England and Wales, it is a tort of strict liability. [2] Its equivalents in criminal law include larceny or theft and criminal conversion. In those jurisdictions that ...
Larceny is a crime involving the unlawful taking or theft of the personal property of another person or business. It was an offence under the common law of England and became an offence in jurisdictions which incorporated the common law of England into their own law (also statutory law), where in many cases it remains in force.
Larceny by trick involves taking another's property through fraud. Embezzlement occurs when a person entrusted with the property, converts the property, deprives without permission or substantially interferes with owners' rights with the intent to defraud. Embezzlement differs from larceny in that the taking of property must not involve trespass.
Fraudulent conversion of property, contrary to section 1(1)(a) of Larceny Act, 1901. PARTICULARS OF OFFENCE. A.B., on the day of , in the county of , fraudulently converted to his own use and benefit certain property, that is to say, 100 l. entrusted to him by H.S. in order that he, the said A.B., might retain the same in safe custody.
For example, the common law crime of larceny requires the taking and carrying away of tangible property from another person, with the intent of permanently depriving the owner of that property. Robbery, under the common law, requires all of the same elements and also the use of force or intimidation to accomplish the taking. Therefore, larceny ...
[3] [2]: 946 The case was significant because in common law at that time, larceny required a trespass by force and arms (vi et armis) or against the peace, which did not occur if the person was willingly handed the bulk or bales of items. [2]: 946 The breaking of the bulk was found to be the required force needed in the element of trespass.
Larceny was a common law offence (created by judicial action) while embezzlement and false pretences were statutory offences (created by legislative action). Larceny is by far the oldest. The elements of larceny were "well-settled" by the 13th century. The only other theft offence then existing was cheat which was a misdemeanor.