It was argued by the defence that Section 4 of the Theft Act 1968 did not define a class of intangible property beyond a chose in action, and therefore information per se was not protected by the Theft Act 1968.
It was contended by the defense that Section 4 of the Theft Act 1968 did not establish a category of intangible assets beyond tangible property, and therefore information in itself was not safeguarded by the Theft Act 1968.