The Theft Act 1968 (c 60) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It creates a number of offences against property in England and Wales. On 15 January 2007 the Fraud Act 2006 came into force, redefining most of the offences of deception. History The Theft Act 1968 resulted from the efforts of the Criminal Law Revision Committee to reform the English law of theft. The Larceny Act 1916 had codified the common law, including larceny itself, but it remained a complex web of offences. The intention of the Theft Act 1968, was to replace the existing law of larceny and other deception-related offences, by a single enactment, creating a more coherent body of principles that would allow the law to evolve to meet new situations. Provisions A number of greatly simplifiedor at least less complicatedoffences were created. Section 1 – Basic definition of "theft" This section creates the offence of theft. This definition is supplemented by sections 2 to 6. The definition of theft under the Theft Act 1968 is: Section 2 – "Dishonestly" This section provides a partial definition of dishonesty for certain purposes. Section 3 – "Appropriation" Appropriation is defined as "Any assumption by a person of the rights of an owner". The courts have interpreted the assumption "of the rights of an owner" to mean that a person assumes at least one of a set of rights rather than having to assume all of the rights of the owners. This interpretation of the legislation was originally given in the case of R v Morris; Anderton v Burnside [1984] UKHL 1, and it has been endorsed by the decision in R v Gomez [1993] AC 442. Section 4 – "Property" The definition of property is: Section 5 – "Belonging to another" The definition of belonging to another is It is possible to have a proprietary right or interest over property that in the ordinary sense belongs to someone else. In the case of R v Turner (No. 2) [1971] 1 WLR 901, the Court of Appeal found that a man had committed theft by driving away his car without having paid for repairs made on the car. The garage that repaired his car had a proprietary right over it. One can have a controlling interest in a piece of property even after selling it. In R v Marshall [1998] 2 Cr App R 282,