Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

What does s47 of the offences against the persons act 1861 set out?

A

This type of offence is assault occasioning actual bodily harm

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

What type of offence is s47 offences against the persons act 1861?

A

A triable either way offence

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

What is the maximum sentence for an s47 offences against the persons act 1861?

A

5 years

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

What is the actus reus of s47 offences against the persons act 1861?

A

The act specifies assault but it has been interpreted to mean either harm by consequence of assault or assault which precedes to battery

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

What is an example of someone being harmed by consequence of assault?

A

Running away from the assault/defendant and falling over

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

What is an example of assault preceding battery?

A

The defendant swearing at the victim then hitting them

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

As part of the actus reus what does the prosecution need to prove?

A

That the act caused actual bodily harm

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

In s47 offences against the persons act 1861: assault occasioning actual bodily harm, what does the term occasioning mean?

A

Causing

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

What did the court state in Miller (1954)?

A

That “actual bodily harm includes hurt or injury calculate to interfere with health or comfort of the victim”

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

When was the statement in Miller made?

A

1954

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

In which case did the court say “actual bodily harm includes hurt or injury”?

A

Miller (1954)

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

What did Lord Hobhouse state in the case of R v Chan-Fook (1994)?

A

That the word actual indicates that though injury does not have to be permanent it should not be “so trivial as to be wholly insignificant”

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

In which case did Lord Hobhouse discuss the word ‘actual’?

A

R v Chan-Fook (1994)

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

What case happened in 1994?

A

R v Chan-Fook

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

In what year was the case of R v Chan-Fook?

A

1994

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

What did Lord Hobhouse say about the word ‘actual’?

A

That the injury does not have to be permanent but should not be “so trivial as to be wholly insignificant”

17
Q

What happened in the case of DPP v Smith (2006)?

A

The court held cutting someone’s hair could amount to ABH when the defendant cut his ex girlfriends pony tail off without her consent

18
Q

What did the court state in the Chan-Fook (1994) case?

A

Psychological injury could also be ABH if there was a clinically recognised condition

19
Q

What are some examples of injuries given by the CPS charging standards which might be treated as ABH?

A

Loss of consciousness
Minor fractures
Loss or breaking of teeth

20
Q

What section of the offences against the persons act 1861 is relevant to non-fatal offences?

A

S47

21
Q

What is the men’s rea for ABH?

A

Same as for battery and assault:

The defendant does not have to be intending or even aware of any risk of harm. At the lowest level they need only be aware that there is a risk the victims might apprehend that they are about to apply some unlawful force

22
Q

What case is relevant to the men’s rea for ABH?

A

R v Savage (1992)

23
Q

When was the case of R v Savage?

A

1992

24
Q

What case was in 1992?

A

R v Savage

25
Q

What happened in the case of R v Savage (1992)?

A

The defendant went to the pub and saw her husbands new girlfriend with some friends. She threw a pint of beer over her and the glass slipper and cut the woman’s wrist

26
Q

What did the court rule in the case of R v Savage (1992)?

A

That the defendant did not need to be aware of the risk that she might cause harm - she did intend to apply the unlawful force which was enough for an S47 conviction

27
Q

What cases are relevant to ABH?

A

R v Savage (1992)
R v Chan-Fook (1994)
DPP v Smith (2006)
Miller (1954)