Holding on to company property

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • HR Solutions
    Suspended

    • Mar 2013
    • 3358

    #16
    It has to have been unlawfully appropriated. In this case it wasn't, it was given to him.
    As far as I see it, it was on loan to him for the period he works for the company. I "give" all our consultants laptops for the period they work for us. The day they leave it gets returned to the company. If I want or need to use it or need to do an upgrade it must be available to the company. So it is not a matter of giving it to him. It is still the company's property.

    Comment

    • BusFact
      Gold Member

      • Jun 2010
      • 843

      #17
      Absolutely. It remains the company property and must be returned. All I'm saying is that I don't think its criminal theft if it doesn't get returned. Rather its a civil case where the company would have to sue the ex employee for the return of the goods.

      There is a SAPS crime category for using a vehicle without the owners permission, but I think this only applies when it was taken by someone known to the complainant without their permission at the time, but who may have had permission in the past. Also not sure if this applies to other types of assets too.

      The only concern I would have is that even if the SAPS CSC opens the case (which I think is unlikely), and the detective proceeds to court with the matter (less likely) and the prosecutor decides to prosecute, then according to you, the charge remains on your record despite the magistrate chucking it out of court. That might be a difficult situation to explain to a future potential employer.

      Comment

      • Basment Dweller
        Silver Member

        • Aug 2014
        • 314

        #18
        Originally posted by BusFact
        I don't think its criminal theft if it doesn't get returned. Rather its a civil case where the company would have to sue the ex employee for the return of the goods.
        This^

        Comment

        • sterne.law@gmail.com
          Platinum Member

          • Oct 2009
          • 1332

          #19
          It is not theft because the intention is lacking.
          See Van Collier 1970 1 SA 417 (A)
          See http://www.saflii.org/za/cases/ZAGPJHC/2009/16.html
          Anthony Sterne

          www.acumenholdings.co.za
          DISCLAIMER The above is merely a comment in discussion form and an open public arena. It does not constitute a legal opinion or professional advice in any manner or form.

          Comment

          Working...