UK: Man who took his date's phone after she refused to pay for half the drinks is cleared of theft

IMO, this does not belong in "men's rights".

This is a man who made a wrong assumption (that the date would be shared expenses, even though it appears he had no agreement to such an arrangement) and then acted criminally (I think he should have been found guilty of theft for stealing her phone). The article also states that he did not make his request for contribution from her until he bought two rounds of drinks. After his request, she tried to politely end the date, and it sounds like he harassed her as she tried to leave (and grabbed her cell phone and ran off)

I know some could say, that the women made the wrong assumption that the man would pay. Fair enough. However, she was making the assumption based on tradition as I assume he asked her out and statistically men typically pay especially on first dates (so her assumption makes more sense compared to his, so I think he has more of an obligation to declare his assumption before the date, especially considering the way he reacts to women who don't pay). I believe he most likely implied to the establishment that he was paying, and if so, then he owes the establishment. If he thinks she has a legal obligation to reimburse him, then he should take her to court and present his evidence, not harass her and steal her phone - or do what most adults do when they have a bad date - walk away and never contact the person again.

What he should have done to make it clear to both his date and the establishment is asked for separate checks at the beginning of the date to make it clear that he was not paying her share. When she could not pay, he should have left it up to the bar to enforce payment or charge her with any criminal activity. It is not up to him to "teach her a lesson". What typically would have occurred from there is the establishment would have asked her for her ID and given 24 hours to pay for her bill, or they would file criminal charges. However, I think it is very likely that the man implied to the bar that he was paying (by submitting his credit card for an open tab, or paying for the drinks as they were served). Most bars do not allow alcohol tabs to go beyond one round until they have a clear idea of whom is paying and how. It is difficult to voluntarily pay for someone's drinks, and then afterwards prove they legally owe you for it.

This case indicates the changing attitudes about which gender will pay for dates. That there was even a question about who pays shows some progress beyond the traditional notion that men pay for everything.

Nonetheless, this guy should have made the terms of engagement (the date) clear from the beginning, and the gal would then have the option of saying that she agreed or not. The guy here has no right to expect her to pay when she did not agree to that arrangement. Furthermore, his way of dealing with it is illegal, and should not be supported. That's what the laws are there for... so people don't engage in self-help such as this guy did when he took the gal's phone.

"This is a man who made a wrong assumption (that the date would be shared expenses"

Umm, are you suggesting the default, expectation is that a man is "required" to pay all date expenses? Would it not be HER who made the wrong assumption that her date would be covering her costs? And don't you think that the assumption, based on tradition, that a man should be expected to pay IS something that should be in men's rights? equality and all that.

"this guy should have made the terms of engagement (the date) clear from the beginning"

I disagree. Whether I wish to pay my dates costs or have her cover her own often depends heavily on how the date itself goes. In other words, whether I find the girl worth investing in. You come off as a douche if you say "you're paying your own tab" before the date even begins. But a woman should always go on a date with the expectation she may be required to pay her own way.

As to how he dealt with the issue, well, I would have demanded separate bills, and told the establishment that her bill was not my issue.