Defences for non-fatal offences

Question 1

Consent

Answer 1

Only available where no harm caused or intended (Collins v Wilcock)

Question 2

Exceptions for consent

Answer 2

Sport (provided assault was within rules and spirit of the game)
Surgical operations
Dangerous exhibitions (ie circus act)
Other lawful activities like tattooing, piercing, circumcision etc.

Question 3

Source providing list of exceptions for consent

Answer 3

Attorney General’s References No.6 of 1980

Question 4

There must be knowledge of nature and quality of the act

Answer 4

R v Tabassum

Question 5

There must have been consent to actual risks involved

Answer 5

R v Dica

Question 6

R v Brown

Answer 6

Consent may be invalid if:

• risk of ‘corrupting young men’, spreading disease or level of pain getting out of control
• acts ‘breed and glorify cruelty’
• it is within public interest to criminalise act

Question 7

Self-defence (common law defence) or prevention of crime (s. 3(1) Criminal Law Act 1967)

Answer 7

Must establish that:

a. D used reasonable force (objective test)
b. in the circumstances as he believed them to be (subjective test)

Question 8

Self-defence can be preemptive

Answer 8

R v Bird

Question 9

D is judged on facts as he honestly believed them to be, even if this was unreasonable or mistaken, unless:

• mistake due to voluntary intoxication
• mistake derives from psychiatric ailment

Answer 9

R v Williams (Gladstone)

Question 10

s. 76 Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008

Answer 10

Use for reasonable force for purposes of self-defence

Allows reasonable and disproportionate force to be used in householder cases

Question 11

Reasonable Chastisement

Answer 11

Parents/those in loco parentis can use reasonable force to discipline their children (R v Hopley)

Question 12

Duress

Answer 12

D must establish that: (Graham)
- D reasonably believes he is threatened with death or serious injury to himself/other (subjective
and
- a person of reasonable firmness of Ds age and gender would have given way to threats as D did (objective)

Question 13

Intoxication

Answer 13

Provided D lacks MR;

• involuntary intoxication can provide defence to all defences against the person
• voluntary intoxication can only provide a defence to s.18 OAPA (cannot be defence to basic intent crimes)

Question 14

Key cases for defences to non-fatal offences against the person

Answer 14

Attorney-Generals Reference 1980 (list of exceptions for consent)
R v Dica (there must have been consent to actual risks involved)
R v Emmett (consent not valid where risk of harm is more than trivial)
R v Bird (self-defence can be preemptive)
R v Williams (test for self-defence)