Non - Fatal Offences Flashcards
What is the definition of assault?
Intentionally or recklessly causing another person to apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence.
Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1969] 1 QB 439; R v Ireland; Burstow [1998] AC 147.
What is the actus reus of assault?
Causing the victim to apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence.
What does ‘apprehension’ mean in the context of assault?
To make the victim expect or anticipate immediate and unlawful personal violence, but not necessarily fear it.
Contrast R v Lamb and R Logdon.
Can words alone constitute an assault?
Yes, words alone and silence can be sufficient to constitute an assault.
R v Ireland; Tuberville v Savage.
What does ‘immediate’ mean in the context of assault?
‘Immediate’ does not mean instantaneous; it can refer to some time not excluding the immediate future.
R v Constanza.
What is meant by ‘unlawful’ in assault?
The act is not done in self-defense or with the victim’s consent.
What constitutes ‘personal violence’ in assault?
All the victim has to anticipate is an unwanted touch.
What must the defendant do to cause apprehension in the victim?
The defendant must do something to make the victim believe they will suffer immediate and unlawful personal violence.
What was the outcome of R v Lamb [1967]?
No assault occurred because the victim did not fear violence; he believed the gun was not capable of firing.
R v Lamb [1967] 2 QB 981 (CA).
What does Logdon v DPP [1976] signify about assault?
If the victim is caused to apprehend a threat, it is irrelevant whether the defendant can actually carry it out.
What did Lord Goddard state in R v Wilson [1955]?
The words ‘get out the knives’ would be sufficient to constitute an assault on their own.
What was concluded in R v Ireland; Burstow [1998] regarding silence?
Silence can convey a message and may form the basis of an assault.
How can words negate an assault?
In Tuberville v Savage, the defendant’s words implied no physical action would be taken, negating the assault.
What does ‘immediacy’ refer to in assault cases?
The courts interpret ‘immediate’ to mean apprehension of personal violence at some time not excluding the immediate future.
R v Constanza.
When is the application of force considered lawful?
When it is done in self-defense or with the victim’s consent.
What did the Court of Appeal suggest about ‘violence’ in Ireland?
Violence could include a threat of psychological harm, but it was rejected by Lord Hope.
What is the mens rea for assault?
The defendant intends or is reckless as to causing the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful personal violence.
What is meant by ‘basic intent crime’ in assault?
Assault can be committed intentionally or recklessly.
What constitutes recklessness in assault?
Seeing a risk that actions will cause the victim to apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence and unreasonably taking that risk.
R v G.
What did R v Savage; Parmenter confirm about recklessness?
Subjective recklessness must be established for any assault charge based on recklessness.
What is the actus reus of battery?
Application of unlawful force on another.
Battery can be inflicted directly, indirectly, or by an omission.
How can battery be inflicted directly?
Through any touching however slight (Collins v Wilcock).
How can battery be inflicted indirectly?
For example, pouring acid in a hand drier which people later use (R v Martin, DPP v K).
Can battery be committed by omission?
Yes, as illustrated in Santana Bermudez.
What does ‘unlawful’ mean in the context of battery?
It means the battery isn’t done in self-defense or with the victim’s consent.
What is meant by ‘force’ in battery?
The merest of touch is sufficient (Collins v Wilcock) and does not have to be rude, hostile, or aggressive (Faulkner v Talbot).
What is the mens rea for battery?
Intention or recklessness as to applying unlawful force on another person (R v Venna).
What constitutes actual bodily harm (ABH)?
It includes any assault or battery that results in harm more than transient and trifling (R v Donovan).
What is the legal definition of grievous bodily harm (GBH)?
It refers to ‘really serious harm’ (DPP v Smith).
What is the actus reus for GBH under OAPA 1861, s 20?
Wound or infliction of grievous bodily harm.
What is the mens rea for GBH under OAPA 1861, s 20?
The defendant must intend or be reckless as to causing some harm.
What is the distinction between s 20 and s 18 of OAPA 1861?
Under s 20, it is enough to intend or foresee some harm; under s 18, the defendant must intend to cause grievous bodily harm.
What are examples of injuries classified under Section 47?
Temporary loss of sensory function, extensive bruising, cutting someone’s hair without consent, minor fractures, psychiatric injury beyond trivial.
These injuries must be more than transient and trifling.
What are examples of injuries classified under Section 20 and Section 18?
Permanent loss of sensory function, broken bones, substantial blood loss, and wounds breaking both layers of skin.
These injuries are considered grievous bodily harm.
What is the mens rea of ABH
Mens rea for the assault or the battery. (No MR required for the actual bodily harm)
Intent or recklessness as to:
causing the victim to apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence; or
applying unlawful force upon another.
Can the AR of ABH be caused by an omission
Yes
What offences is cutting off hair
ABH
Does ABH include psychiatric injury
Yes - Needs to be a clinical condition not just fear, distress or panic
