Disclaimer: This work was produced by one of our expert legal writers, as a learning aid to help law students with their studies.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of LawTeacher.net. Any information contained in this case summary does not constitute legal advice and should be treated as educational content only.

Metropolitan Police Commissioner v Charles

329 words (1 pages) Case Summary

16th Jul 2019 Case Summary Reference this In-house law team

Jurisdiction / Tag(s): UK Law

Metropolitan Police Commissioner v Charles (1977)

Deception – Fraud – Obtaining Pecuniary Advantage by Deception


The defendant’s bank account was overdrawn and he had been warned by his bank manager not to write more than one cheque a day for more than £30.  Despite this, he went to gamble in a casino.  He bought chips from the casino using a chequebook backed by a guarantee card issued to him by his bank.  The defendant was aware that the amounts that he was drawing for would result in him exceeding his overdraft limit of £100.  He was charged with obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception contrary to s16 Theft Act 1968 and convicted.


Whether the person deceived under s16 Theft Act 1968 had to suffer any pecuniary loss caused by the deception.  Whether the pecuniary advantage gained had to be from the deceived party.


The defendant’s conviction was upheld.  The defendant had induced, by deception, the casino’s staff through the presentation of the cheque guarantee card into accepting cheques that he knew would not be honoured.  Whilst the casino did not suffer any loss as a result of the deception, as the bank had implicitly guaranteed the defendant’s cheques in any event through allowing him use of the card, s16 Theft Act 1968 did not require them to; it only required that the accused, by deception, obtained for himself or another a pecuniary advantage.  This the defendant did.  There was therefore a causal link between the deception in the form of using the cheque guarantee card to induce the casino staff to accept his cheques, and the pecuniary advantage he gained by obtaining chips for cheques which he did not have the credit to obtain, regardless of the fact that the casino did not suffer a loss.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

Related Content

Jurisdictions / Tags

Content relating to: "UK Law"

UK law covers the laws and legislation of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Essays, case summaries, problem questions and dissertations here are relevant to law students from the United Kingdom and Great Britain, as well as students wishing to learn more about the UK legal system from overseas.

Related Articles