Who Owns The Contents Of A Skip?

[ladybirder]

If I see something I could make use of in a skip outside of someone's house, am I breaking the law if I help myself to it?

[ladybirder]

Thanks Chris. I got my info from here - 5th para down.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-13037808

[Buenchico]

Your link correctly quotes the first part of the law. (See Para 1(1) from my link). But it fails to acknowledge that the appropriation of property is NOT 'dishonest' (and therefore not 'theft') if there is a genuine belief that the person who owns the property would not object to such appropriation. (See Para 2 (1) (a) from my link).

[ladybirder]

Don't you ever get fed up of being right Chris? Ta:-))

[ChuckFickens]

There is an issue with who actually owns the property though.

At which point does the item cease to the the property of the person throwing it in the skip (who it may be reasonably expected to not mind you taking it) and at which point does it become the property of the owner of the skip (who may object to you taking it)

[ladybirder]

I had supposed that would be when the owner of the skip collects it from outside the house of the skip hirer and takes it away. And once he empties it at the landfill site or wherever, the contents then belong to the owners of the site. But won't be surprised if I'm wrong again:-(

[Peter Pedant]

I dunno

actually I do know.... if it is toss up between St Freddie and Santa Buena, then this time I go for St F.

rs delicta...... well I would go for animus abandonandi
which no-one's heard of, because it is Roman Law thingey we dont have in English Law.

It is established that if someone throws something away there is no animus abandonandi and title either remains in him or goes to the dustbin men/corporation

I was very nearly screwed for taking something off the corporation dump.

A group of Engineering student in Bristol of which I was friends with one, were charged with stealing a rotating petrol sign (rag week of course). Was it Fina ? anyway it rotated in the wind. (early seventies)
They were acquitted because they pleaded that they thought it belonged to no one. Cue very long arguments amongst the lawyers which the students didnt understand.
Judge held on the facts (bit garbled here) that no theft had occurred.
and so and so - can you guess what the students did ?
They applied since there was no theft, for the sign to be restored to them.
Cue for even more impassioned pleading by both sides
and the judge refused to grant the order.


OK international example
Iranian revolution 1979. Do you remember Bishop Ali, ? Anglican Bishop in Iran whose son was shot dead in mistake for him ? The revolutionaries also marched into the Deaf and Blind institute and occupied it evicting the deaf and blind because they said no one was in charge.
[abandoned geddit ?}
Oh easy one - I said to Bishop Ali - there is no general idea of animus abandonandi , which means that it is not anyone's to occupy which means that lawful transfer of title has not occurred. It depends on whether the Iranian system is based on English law (1979) at that time.

For God's sake, you dont really think you are going to get it back do you ? I added.

[Peter Pedant]

covered by Fred Pulis case
Williams v Phillips 1956
( old crime of larceny but so what ?)

http://swarb.co.uk/williams-v-phillips-cca-1956/