1- Translate the following legal text into legal Farsi 2- Place the Farsi and English text with a line between each other, that is, the English text should be one line.    A space and then a line of Farsi translation and...
                4- Using legal language for Persian translation 5- Continue to the end of the text

                   .Obtaining property by  deception  
The difference between this offence and theft is that here the owner has vol-  untarily handed over the property in consequence of the fraud of D. By s.  15(1) the offence is committed by 'a person who by any deception dishon-  estly obtains property belonging to another, with the intention of perman-  ently depriving the other of it`  
'Óbtain' includes obtaining for another or enabling another to obtain or  retain. D obtains property under s. 15 if he or she obtains ownership, possession  or control of it; thus if D obtains possession by a trick, that is theft by a trick, but  it iS also obtaining by deception and it would be better to charge D under s. 15.  
R. v. Preddy (1996)  The House of Lords has held that no identifiable property passes from the  payer to the payee where a payment is made between two bank accounts by  cheque or by telegraphic or electronic transfer, and therefore a payee cannot be  guilty of dishonestly obtaining property belonging to another under s. 15(1) of  the 1968 Act.  
As a result of this decision, the Theft (Amendments) Act, 1996 created a  new s. 15A of the Theft Act, 1968, as amended by the Theft Act, 1978. This  provides that, in effect, the action by Preddy would now be a specific offence.  Note: Further amendments have been made in accordance with the Fraud  Act, 2006. The new s. 15A is entitled 'obtaining a money transfer by deception?  The obtaining must be induced by the deception, therefore it is not the  offence if P is not deceived, but it is an attempt (Hensler, 1870, approved by  the House of Lords in Haugbton v. Smith, 1975); and the obtaining must not  
be too remote, as in Clucas (1949) where D, by a false pretence, induced  bookmakers to accept credit bets, the practice being not to pay if the horse  did not win, but to collect the winnings if the horse did win; on this occasion  it won and the court held that the effective cause of obtaining the money was  not the deception but backing the winner.  The deception may be by 'words or conduct and as to fact or as to law,  including a deception as to the present intentions of the person using the decep-  tion or any other person'. Active concealment of defects would amount to  conduct'; as would going into an Oxford tailors' wearing an undergraduate  gown if the person 1S not  member of 2 college (Barnard, 1837)  A promise made not intending to fulfil it 1S sufficient; and SO 1S an implied  promise, as where a person orders a meal in a restaurant (ones, 1878).  S. 15 says nothing about statements of opinion, but on principle it should  count as deception where the opinion is not honestly held,  The deception may be "deliberate or reckless'. With regard to statements,  the House of Lords in Derry v. Peek (1889), a case on the tort of deceit, held  that the defendants could not be liable if they honestly believed what they  had said (see p. 144).  Property' is wider than in theft: the s. 4 limitations do not apply,.  Apart from being 'deliberate or reckless' the deception must be dishonest.  If the same view as in Feely (1973), a theft case, is taken then the matter of  dishonesty should be left to the jury.