Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

OCR A-Level Law Paper 1 > 1B - Non Fatal Offences Against The Person > Flashcards

1B - Non Fatal Offences Against The Person Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards Civil Procedure 1L flashcards
1
Q

Assault and battery are common law offences under which act?

A

s.39 Criminal Justice Act 1988

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What kind of offence is assault?

A

Summary offence with a sentence of 6 months

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What is the actus reus of assault?

A

Act causing the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful force

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What is the mens rea of assault?

A

The intention to cause another to fear immediate unlawful force or being reckless as to whether such fear is caused

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Which case an omission (failure to act) was not enough for assault?

A

R v Nelson

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Which case showed words can amount to an assault?

A

Constanza

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Which case showed silence can amount to an assault?

A

R v Ireland

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Which case showed that the victim must fear an unlawful force?

A

R v Lamb

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Which case showed that immediate does not have to be instantaneous?

A

Smith v CS of Woking Police Station

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What case showed that words can negate actions?

A

Tuberville v Savage

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Which case do you contrast with Tuberville v Savage?

A

R v Light

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What cases do you use to support the mens rea of assault?

A

Mohan, Woolin and Cunningham

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What kind of offence is battery?

A

Summary offence with a sentence of 6 months

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What is the actus reus of battery?

A

The application of unlawful force to another person

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What is the mens rea of battery?

A

intending either to apply unlawful force or being reckless as to whether unlawful force is being applied

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Which cases show that force and even the slightest touch can be enough to amount to a battery?

A

Collins v Wilcock

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Which case shows that even touching a person’s clothing can be assault?

A

R v Thomas

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Which case shows that a battery can be by continuing act?

A

Fagan v MPC

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Which case shows that the failure to tell if a needle was sufficient for battery?

A

DPP v Santa-Bermudez

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Which cases show the application of unlawful force can be an indirect act?

A

DPP v K

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What is the definition of application of unlawful force?

A

genuine consent isn’t given and either express or implied and not in self-defence

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What are some examples of possible battery’s without there being an assault?

A

Pushing somebody from behind, touching a blind person and if the victim doesn’t think the threat will be carried out

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Where can the offence of ABH be found?

A

s.47 Offences Against The Person Act 1861

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What kind of offence is ABH

A

Triable either way offence with a sentence of 5 years

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

How is ABH defined?

A

Whosoever shall be convicted of any assault occasioning actual bodily harm shall be liable to imprisonment for 5 years

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

What is the actus reus of ABH?

A

assault occasioning ABH

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

What is the problem with the actus reus of ABH?

A

There’s no definition of ‘assault’ or ‘bodily harm’ in the actus reus

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

What does assault in s.47 mean?

A

It means common assault - assault or battery

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

What is the mens rea for ABH?

A

It’s the mens rea for the underlying assault or battery

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

What does ‘occasioning’ mean?

A

Causing - normal rules of causation apply

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

How is mens rea for the underlying assault or battery defined for ABH?

A

MR for assault OR MR for battery

There does not need to be any intention or subjective recklessness as to causing harm

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

What is the problem with the mens rea for ABH?

A

Assault alone is about 6 months, but ABH is 5 years. The mens rea is the same even if they didn’t intend to cause harm just apply force. Unfair to the D but fair to the V

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

Where can the offence of GBH be found?

A

Offences against the person act 1861

34
Q

Which section is GBH with intent in?

A

s.18

35
Q

Which section is GBH without intent in?

A

s.20

36
Q

What is the actus reus of s.20 OAPA 1861?

A

to unlawfully wound or inflict GBH

37
Q

What is the difference between s.18 and s.20 OAPA 1861?

A

s.20 says wound or cause whereas s.18 says wound or inflict

38
Q

What does inflict mean?

A

It means ‘causing’ thus meaning the actus reus of s.20 and s.18 are the same and we use the same cases

  • doesn’t need an assault or a battery to cause it (normal rules of causation apply)
  • R v Burstow
39
Q

What is the actus reus of s.18 OAPA 1861?

A

to unlawfully wound or cause any GBH

OR

resist/prevent arrest

40
Q

What is the mens rea of s.18 OAPA 1861? - CHECK CASES

A

maliciously and intention to do some GBH

OR with intent to resist or prevent the lawful apprehension or detainer of any person

recklessness isn’t enough to satisfy the offence

  • P must prove D’s purpose is to cause GBH (Belfon)
  • intention to wound is not enough (Taylor)
  • P must prove D had intention to resist/prevent arrest but only that he was reckless as to whether his actions would wound or cause injury (Morrison)
41
Q

What is a wound?

A

Cut or break in all layers of skin - ie not a scratch
It can be a break in internal skin eg. bleeding inside the mouth but not internal bleeding. A nose bleed may not be a wound if its a result of internal damage

As held in JCC v Eisenhower

42
Q

Mens rea for s.20 OAPA 1861?

A

The intention or subjective recklessness as to causing some harm albeit not serious harm (Parmenter)

‘maliciously’ doesn’t require any ill will (Cunningham)

And there is no need for the D to foresee a risk of wound or serious harm - only some harm

43
Q

Maliciously in s.18 OAPA 1861?

A

Held that maliciously adds nothing where GBH is intended

44
Q

What about resisting arrest in s.18 OAPA 1861?

A

The prosecution must prove D had the intention to resist or prevent arrest but only that he was reckless as to whether his actions would wound or cause an injury

45
Q

What is GBH?

A
  • ‘really serious harm’ DPP v Smith
  • ‘serious harm’ held that ‘serious’ added nothing Saunders
  • take into account V’s age and health Bollom
  • serious psychiatric harm can be GBH Burstow
  • can be disease Dica
  • does not need contact Martin
46
Q

Are written letters an assault? (Give example)

A

Yes, as held in R v Constanza (1997)

47
Q

Are silent telephone calls an assault? (Give example)

A

Yes, as held in R v Ireland (1997)

48
Q

Is fear of what an offender might do next enough for the actus reus?

A

Yes -as held in Smith v Chief Superintendent of Woking Police Station (1983)

49
Q

There is no assault in a scenario where it is obvious that the defendant cannot actually use force. What are the two exceptions?

A

Calls (R v Constanza (1997)) and letters (R v Ireland (1997))

50
Q

Give two cases causing the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful force.

A

Tuberville and Savage (1669) and R v Light (1857)

51
Q

Give some examples of assault

A

Raising a fist as though about to hit the victim.

Throwing a stone at the victim, which just misses.

Pointing a loaded gun at someone within range.

Making a threat by saying “I am going to hit you”.

52
Q

What happens if the force threatened is lawful?

A

The force which is threated must be unlawful.

If it is lawful, there is no offence of common assault.

53
Q

Define battery

A

The application of unlawful force to another person intending either to apply unlawful physical force to another or recklessness as to whether unlawful force is applied.

54
Q

What is the actus reus for battery?

A

The application of unlawful force to another person.

55
Q

Which case shows that “force” is a misleading word?

A

Collins v Wilcock (1984) - It was held that “force” can include the slightest touching.

56
Q

Can battery be committed through a continuing act?

A

Yes, as seen in Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner (1968).

57
Q

Is touching the victim’s clothing sufficient to form a battery?

A

Yes, as seen in R v Thomas (1985).

The Court of Appeal said that touching a person’s clothes whilst he is wearing them is equivalent to touching him.

58
Q

What happened in Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner (1968)?

A
  • A police officer told the defendant to park by the kerb.
  • In doing this, the defendant drove onto the policeman’s food, without realised he had done so.
  • Initially, the defendant refused to move the car.
  • The policeman had pointed out what had happened and asked the defendant multiple times to move the car off his food.
  • Eventually, the defendant did move the car.
  • It was held: offence of battery was only committed at the moment when the intention was formed to leave the wheel on the officer’s foot.
59
Q

What happened in Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner (1968)?

A
  • A police officer told the defendant to park by the kerb.
  • In doing this, the defendant drove onto the policeman’s food, without realised he had done so.
  • Initially, the defendant refused to move the car.
  • The policeman had pointed out what had happened and asked the defendant multiple times to move the car off his food.
  • Eventually, the defendant did move the car.
  • It was held: offence of battery was only committed at the moment when the intention was formed to leave the wheel on the officer’s foot.
60
Q

Can battery we done though an indirect act?

A

Yes. This can happen when a defendant causes force to be applied, even though he does not personally touch the victim.

61
Q

Give two examples of when battery was done though an indirect act?

A

R v Martin (1881) and DPP v K (1990)

62
Q

What was ruled by the High Court in DPP v K?

A

“A common assault could be committed by an indirect act.”

63
Q

Can the actus reus for battery be fulfilled by an omission?

A

Criminal liability can arise by an omission if the defendant is under a duty to act.

64
Q

When might a duty to act arise?

A

A contract

A relationship

From the assumption of care for another

From the creator of a dangerous situation

65
Q

What happened in DPP v Santa Bermudez (2003)

A

A police officer was seriously injured by a needle in a defendant’s pocket, which he did not declare before the search, which caused bleeding.

Court held: The defendant’s failure to act (tell the officer of the needle) could amount to the actus reus of assault causing actual bodily harm.

66
Q

When might be a force be un/lawful?

A

For a battery to be committed, the force must be unlawful.

Force may be lawful if the victim gives genuine consent to it or under self defence or prevention of crime.

67
Q

Is it possible for there to be a battery without an assault?

A

Yes.

This can occur where the victim is unsure that unlawful force is out to be used on him.

For example, if an attacker comes up unseen behind the victim’s back.

68
Q

What is the mens rea for battery?

A

Either an intention to apply unlawful physical force to another, or recklessness as to whether unlawful force is applied.

The defendant must realise there is a risk that his act/omission could cause unlawful force to be applied to another.

69
Q

Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm - s47 OAPA 1861

A
  • Lowest level of injury is referred to as actual bodily harm.
  • Triable either way offence.
  • Convicted = imprisonment for five years
70
Q

Define Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm

A

An assault which causes the victim actual bodily harm and the defendant intends or is subjectively reckless as to whether the victim fears unlawful force or is actually subjected to unlawful force.

71
Q

In what case was it held cutting the victim’s hair amounts of ABH?

A

DPP v Smith (Michael) (2006)

72
Q

Is psychiatric injury classed under actual bodily harm?

A

Yes. As held by the Court of Appeal in R v Chan Fook (1994).

73
Q

What is the mens rea for S47?

A

The defendant must intend to be subjectively reckless as to whether the victim fears or is subjected to unlawful force.

74
Q

In what cases was it held that intention to apply unlawful force is sufficient for the mens rea of a s47 offence?

A

R v Savage (1991) and R v Parmenter (1991)

75
Q

What is GBH?

A

Means “really serious harm”, as held in DPP v Smith (1961)

76
Q

What happened in JCC v Eisenhower (1983)?

A

The victim was hit in the eye with a shotgun pellet.

As it did not penetrate the eye, it was held it was not a would.

The cut must be of the whole skin, so a scratch isn’t considered to be a wound.

77
Q

In which case was it decided that psychiatric injury can be GBH?

A

R v Burstow (1997)

78
Q

Why was the case of R v Dica (2004) significant?

A

It was the first conviction for causing GBH by infecting victims with HIV.

79
Q

In which case was it held “maliciously did not require any ill will towards the person injured. It simply meant that any intention to do that particular kind of harm was done or recklessness as to whether such harm should occur or not”.

A

R v Cunningham (1957)

80
Q

What is the definition of s18 OAPA? - Wounding/causing GBH with intent.

A

“Whosoever shall be unlawfully and maliciously wound or cause any grievous bodily harm to any person, with intent to do some grievous bodily harm to any person, or with intent to resist or prevent the lawful apprehension or detainer of any person, shall be guilty of…an offence”

81
Q

How is s18 more serious than s20?

A

The maximum punishment for s20 is 5 years in prison (and is a triable-either-way offence) whereas the maximum punishment for s18 is life imprisonment (and is an indictable offence).

OCR A-Level Law Paper 1 (48 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions