Case Law

Question 1

Serious assaults - case law

− R v Mohan

_− R v Waaka
− R v Taisalika
− DPP v Smith
− R v Waters
− R v Donovan
− R v Harney
− R v Tihi
− R v Wati
− R v Sturm
− R v Crossan _

− R v Rapana and Murray

Answer 1

Serious assaults - case law

− R v Mohan - Intent
− R v Waaka - Intent
− R v Taisalika - intent inferred by result
− DPP v Smith - definiton of GBH
− R v Waters - definition of wound
− R v Donovan - definition of bodily harm as per injury definition (sec. 2)
− R v Harney - Recklessness
− R v Tihi - Further intent / exposure to risk
− R v Wati - Proof of offence if involving flight
− R v Sturm - under 191(1)(a) completion not req.
− R v Crossan - by any violent means

− R v Rapana and Murray - Disfigurement - permanence vs temporary

Question 2

R v Waters

Answer 2

R v Waters
“A breaking of the skin would be commonly regarded as a characteristic of a wound. The breaking of the skin will be normally evidenced by a flow of blood and, in its occurrence at the site of a blow or impact, the wound will more often than not be external. But there are those cases where the bleeding which evidences the separation of tissues may be internal.”

Question 3

_R v Donovan _

Answer 3

_R v Donovan _
’Bodily harm’ … includes any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of [the victim] … it need not be permanent, but must, no doubt, be more than merely transitory and trifling.

Question 4

_R v Tihi _

Answer 4

_R v Tihi _
In addition to one of the specific intents outlined in paragraphs (a), (b) or (c), “it must be shown that the offender either meant to cause the specified harm, or foresaw that the actions undertaken by him were likely to expose others to the risk of suffering it.”

Question 5

R v Harney

Answer 5

_R v Harney _
“[Recklessness involves] foresight of dangerous consequences that could well happen, together with an intention to continue the course of conduct regardless of the risk.”

Question 6

R v Sturm

Answer 6

R v Sturm
Under section 191(1)(a) “it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove the intended crime was actually subsequently committed”.

Question 7

R v Wati

Answer 7

R v Wati
There must be proof of the commission or attempted commission of a crime either by the person committing the assault or by the person whose arrest or flight he intends to avoid or facilitate.

Question 8

R v Crossan

Answer 8

R v Crossan
“Incapable of resistance” includes a powerlessness of the will as well as a physical incapacity.