Is this for an assignment?
What is the context?
Are you charged with these offences?
We don't use the Larceny Act anymore.
Oh I see.
It really doesn't matter whether the elements are the same or not. Broadly the fraud act hasn't changed all that much. In any event, the case law can be relied upon as persuasive argument even if it predates.
The only issue here though is that very old authorities tend to be less persuasive because of their age and the fact that modern thinking has changed.
The three statutes are not quite the same by virtue of the fact that they are not the same and use different words but the elements are broadly the same.
Can I clarify anything for you?
No, you are not wrong. As I said above.
That is right.
It is not really something I can comment upon in this forum. I have had no vision of the evidence.
You would really need to offer the authority to your solicitors and counsel.
Well, it is not really applicable.
It is not really a rule of law either.
Cases turn upon their facts.
The reasoning within the cases is what gives rise to principles.
There are no limitations upon law.
But some law falls into disuse.
At least Acts of Parliament do not have statutes.
I see you have not yet rated my previous post so I would be grateful if you could do that now.