Assault Cases

Question 0

Tuberville v Sauvage

Answer 0

Words can negate an assault.

Question 1

Ireland ( 2 precedents

Answer 1

1. Words alone can constitute an assault (since a thing said is also a thing done)
2. The immediacy requirement for assault extends to fear of the mere possibility of imminent attack.

Question 2

Read v Coker

Answer 2

A conditional threat may constitute an assault if V fears imminent personal attack should the condition not be fulfilled.

Question 3

Constanza

Answer 3

The requirement of imminence is satisfied if V fears attack at some point NOT EXCLUDING the imminent future.

Question 4

Cox

Answer 4

If there are multiple threatening acts, the more incidents that have not been followed up by violence the more implausible V’s fear of immediate violence becomes.

Question 5

DPP v Ramos

Answer 5

It is V’s state of mind and not the statistical risk of violence actively occurring within a short time that is crucial.

Question 6

Savage and Parmenter

Answer 6

Recklessness for assault is subjectively determined, affirming Spratt.