Available 24/7 for legal advice 0415 582 404
Free Consultation
According to the Australia Bureau of Statistics, 2.4% of Australian households experienced theft from a motor vehicle. 0.3% of persons experienced robbery. Likewise, card fraud increased from 6.9% in 2020-21 to 8.1% in 2021-22.
Fraud, theft, and robbery charges can be complex, so having a trusted legal representative in your corner is essential to understanding the legalities and putting forward a solid defence.
This article will explore the definitions of the offences of robbery, fraud, and theft, explain the charges in Victoria, and discuss how a criminal lawyer can support your case in court.
Fraud, theft, and robbery are indictable offences in Victoria defined under the Crimes Act 1958. Let’s explore how these three charges are defined.
The theft offence is listed in the Crimes Act 1958 Section 74. However, its basic definition is laid out in Sections 72 (1) and 73.
Theft offences have three elements:
Robbery is an offence under the Crimes Act 1958, Section 75. The elements of this offence include:
Obtaining property by deception is a crime under section 81 of the Crimes Act 1958.
The offence must include:
Many types of theft, robbery, and fraud may lead one to face court.
Theft. Vehicular theft, theft of services, identity theft, data theft, burglary, shoplifting, and embezzlement.
Fraud. Payroll fraud, bond fraud, payment fraud, phishing, accounting fraud, employment scams, debt collection scams, falsifying documents, bribery, and money laundering.
Robbery. Bank robbery, carjacking, armed robbery, purse snatching, strong-armed robbery, home invasion, and aggravated robbery.
Do you need a solid legal defence? As a criminal lawyer serving Ringwood, Heidelberg, and Western Suburbs, May Lawyers offers trustworthy legal advice, so you don’t need to worry about a penalty of imprisonment.
Fraud offences are heard by the Magistrates Court or County Court of Victoria. Charges depend on the amount alleged stolen, the length of the fraud, and the accused’s record. With this in mind, what fraud offences could you be looking at?
A jury must be satisfied that the accused obtained property by deception, whether possession, control, or ownership. This includes obtaining property for another person or enabling another to obtain or retain the property.
Property can include money, things in action, tangible property, or things without physical existence, such as debts. It is up to a judge whether a circumstance creates a property right.
The accused must obtain property “belonging to another”, and this can include a person who has equitable or legal proprietary interests. A prosecution only needs to establish that someone other than the accused has property rights.
With abandoned property, property no longer belongs to a person who relinquished all ownership rights, meaning that taking possession does/does not constitute fraud.
A jury will consider the accused’s state of mind when they obtained the property and whether the intention was to deprive the owner permanently.
This is still valid even if the accused agrees to return the property–such as cash or goods–for equivalent yet not identical property or only intends to temporarily deprive the property.
According to Sections 73 (12) and (13), the accused can be deemed to have the intention to deprive someone of property permanently, even if that was not the intention. This includes if the property is intended to be treated equally as their own.
Section 73 (12) is relevant if the accused takes the property and promises to return it in exchange for payment, altering its nature by receiving a payment from the bank, lending to a third party with the promise of return, or leaving open the possibility that the property will be returned at a later time.
The prosecution needs to prove the accused made a representation by words or conduct, the representation was false or about existing or past facts or law, the accused was aware of false representation, there was an intention to claim the property, the victim believed the false representation, and the accused obtained the property as a result of deception.
Want to know more about the legal landscape? Read up on a guide to types of assault and violence charges.
A jury must be satisfied that the accused appropriated property which belonged to another.
Theft can only be committed as an act of “appropriation”, meaning they assumed any rights of the owner or adversely interfered with or usurped the owner’s rights.
This can include assuming the rights of an owner and taking any of the owner’s rights, such as using, damaging, extinguishing, lending, retaining, or offering to sell another’s property.
If the accused intended to deprive the property owner permanently, they can be charged. This is also the case if the accused intended to return the property after the interest was met, such as returning concert tickets after use.
In terms of motor vehicles and aircraft, proof that a person used them in any manner without consent from the owner counts as permanently depriving the owner, even if the vehicle was not moved.
However, this offence is not met if the accused temporarily deprives the property owner or has not decided how to dispose of the property.
When used in Division 2 of the Crimes Act, dishonesty means the accused acted without any claim of legal right.
In Victoria, Section 72 (2) states the accused is not to be regarded as dishonest if they believed there is a legal right to deprive the owner of the property, the owner would have consented to the appropriation if the circumstances were known, and the owner could not be discovered after taking reasonable steps, such as calling the police.
Under Section 75 of the Crimes Act, robbery – including armed robbery – is an offence. The accused needs to have stolen something, used force on a person, put a person in fear of force, or sought to put the person in fear.
The accused must have used force “immediately before or at the time” of the theft, according to Section 75 (1).
No legal standard for minimum physical contact constitutes the use of force, as it is for a jury to determine. The “force” does not need to be directly applied to the victim’s body and can be by items carried by the assailant.
Force must have been used or threatened “in order to” carry out the robbery offence. A jury must consider the accused’s purpose when committing the relevant acts.
Proving conduct committed does not require proof that the force or threat of force caused the victim to part with property taken and does not require the force to have been used for overpowering the party robbed.
Robbery and theft charges can seem similar. At May Lawyers, you can speak to a qualified criminal lawyer who services Windsor, Richmond, and Fairfield residents for accuracy and legal advice on your case.
At May Lawyers, I understand how losing your licence, reputation, or liberty can impact your way of life.
As an accredited criminal law specialist in Victoria, I take on your case as if it were my own. Recognised by the Law Institute of Victoria, I bring you a decade of experience in criminal law, whether you need support with bail applications or confiscation, a traffic offence lawyer, or a drug offence lawyer, I can offer strong, reliable legal support.
Contact us today for a compassionate and professional discussion. We’re available 24/7 if you’ve been arrested, so you don’t need to stress about the outcome.