Which principle is established in R v Howson regarding the defence of colour of right?

In R v Howson, the principle established relates to the concept of "colour of right," specifically that an honest belief in a right to property can negate the intent required for theft. This means that if a person honestly believes they have a right to possess or use someone else's property, this belief can serve as a defense against a charge of theft. The essence of this principle is that criminal intent is a critical element in theft, and if that intent is absent due to the individual's genuine belief in their ownership or entitlement to the property, they may not be culpable under the law.

This case underscores that a mistake or an honest belief about one’s rights does not equate to criminal intent, which is a necessary component for theft. Consequently, the defense of "colour of right" effectively allows for the possibility that someone might engage with another's property without the intention to deprive the true owner, therefore providing a legitimate defense in theft cases.