Does the criminal law leave too much to the jury when it comes to the issue of dishonesty?

Dishonesty is an essential element of the property offences including fraud and theft. The jury will be directed by the judge to consider whether reasonable people would consider the conduct of the defendant to be dishonest. This is the current test set out by the Supreme Court in Ivey which is a departure from the old Ghosh test. Where the jury had to consider whether the conduct was dishonest by the standards of reasonable people and whether the defendant was aware that his conduct would be viewed as dishonest. However, can we really be sure that there is universal agreement about what conduct is dishonest? Some may regard the card inspection in Ivey as a legitimate tactic whilst others may consider it to be cheating. There is no consensus in society as to what is dishonest. This raises the possibility that like cases are not being treated alike and the guilt of defendants will vary from jury to jury on almost identical facts. Such inconsistency in the application of the law is indefensible.