Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Law > Non Fatal Offences > Flashcards

Non Fatal Offences Flashcards

Assault, Battery, ABH, Wounding, GBh

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
MBE flashcards MPRE flashcards Civil Procedure 1L flashcards
1
Q

What is the definition of assault in common law?

A

Intentionally or recklessly causing the victim to apprehend immediate violence.

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

What is the actus reus of assault

A

actions or words that cause the victim to apprehend immediate violence

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

What physical reactions can indicate assault?

A

Shaking, crying, running away, etc.

These reactions show the victim’s apprehension of violence.

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

Read v Coker (1853)

A

Established that apprehension of immediate and unlawful violence constitutes assault.

The case illustrates how gestures can lead to an assault charge.

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

R v Ireland (1977)

A

-D. breathed silently down the phone
## Footnote

Silence can amount to assault.

This case expanded the definition of assault to include non-verbal threats.

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

R v Constanza (1997)

A

-D. graffitied a threat
## Footnote

Writing can be considered assault.

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

Tuberville v Savage (1669)

A

-“if… i would”
## Footnote

Words can negate an assault.
If = NO assault

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

Smith v C.C. of Woking (1983)

A

-D. stared into ground floor house
## Footnote

The threat must be in the near future to constitute assault.

The case emphasized that the victim’s apprehension of violence is crucial.

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

Logdon v DPP (1976)

A

-V. has fake gun pulled

Apprehension of a threat matters more than whether the threat can actually happen.

The victim’s perception of danger is key.

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

What is the Actus Reus (AR) for battery?

A

Causing a victim to apprehend immediate force

Battery involves the application of this unlawful force to another person.

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

Define battery in legal terms.

A

Application of unlawful force, regardless of injury

Battery is considered a non-fatal offence.

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

What case established that touching clothes can constitute battery?

A

R v Thomas (1985)

In this case, touching a girl’s skirt was deemed sufficient for battery.

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

How can battery be applied

A

Direct and indirect, recklessness

Pagett, Woollin, Cunningham

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

When is force unlawful?

A

Through implied consent eg sports or ordinary jostling eg messing around

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

In which case was there ordinary jostling?

A

Wilson v Pringle (1986)

The court found that the actions were not malicious and lacked mens rea.

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

True or False: Battery requires physical injury to the victim.

A

False

Battery does not require injury; it is about the application of force.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Fill in the blank: Battery is defined as the application of _______.

A

unlawful force

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What are examples of activities that may involve battery?

A
  • Rugby
  • Boxing
  • Martial arts

These activities may involve the application of force that can be considered battery under certain circumstances.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What is the significance of ‘ordinary jostlings’ in relation to battery?

A

They may not constitute battery

Ordinary jostlings typically do not meet the threshold for unlawful force.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What is ‘ordinary jostling’?

A

Inevitable contact in crowded places like supermarkets or busy streets

Referenced in Collins v Wilcock (1984), where a woman could not complain about incidental contact.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What was the main issue in Collins v Wilcock (1984)?

A

A woman walking away from an officer was grabbed, leading to a struggle and a scratch on the officer

The case illustrates the limits of permissible contact in public spaces.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

In the context of battery, what constitutes ‘ordinary jostling’?

A

Shaking hands, a slap on the back, or brushing shoulders etc.

Exceeding this ordinary jostling can lead to a battery claim.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

What was the ruling in Fagan v MPC?

A

Force can be applied through a continuing act, such as driving over a foot and staying on it

This case emphasizes the application of force in a continuous manner.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What incident was involved in the case of Santana Bermudez (2003)?

A

An officer was injured when D. failed to inform officer about a sharp object in pockets

This case highlights force can be through omission due to the duty to inform about potential dangers.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

True or False: An omission can lead to liability if the defendant has a duty to act.

A

True

Liability may arise when a person’s failure to act causes harm.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Fill in the blank: A defendant can be liable for an injury caused by a _______ if they neglect their duty.

A

[sharp object]

Example from Santana Bermudez (2003) where failure to disclose a sharp object led to injury.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

What did DPP v K conclude?

A

Force can be applied indirectly through objects.

D. placed acid from chem lab in hand dryer as a prank injuring other student

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

What is the mens rea of battery?

A

Intentionally or recklessly applying unlawful force

Mohan, Cunningham

Only direct/reckless

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Battery actus reus explain exam paragraph

A

For the actus reus, D apply unlawful force to V.
Wilson v Pringle shows this force must be hostile and go beyond the ordinary jostlings of everyday life.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Battery mens rea explain exam paragraph

A

The mens rea of battery is applying unlawful force intentionally or recklessly. Intention refers to direct intent, where D. aims to bring about the consequence (R v Mohan). Recklessness refers to D. recognising a risk but carrying on regardless (R v Cunningham) Therefore to have the mesn rea for battery D. must either aim to cause the consequence or see a risk but carry on regardless, applying unlawful force.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

What does ABH stand for?

A

Actual Bodily Harm

Defined in S47 of Offences Against the Person Act 1861.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

What is defined as bodily harm in the context of ABH?

A

Defined in Section 47 of OAPA 1861 as assault occasioning actual bodily harm

Includes both physical injuries and psychological harm.

33
Q

What are the three requirements to prove ABH?

A
  • Not insignificant harm (also not serious)
  • Assault or battery must occur
  • Victim suffers an ABH-level injury
34
Q

What is the actus reus (AR) of assault in ABH cases?

A

Causing the victim to apprehend immediate violence

Assault must create a fear of immediate harm.

35
Q

What constitutes battery in the context of ABH?

A

Applying unlawful force

Battery involves physical contact that is unlawful.

36
Q

What is an example of an ABH injury?

A

R v Miller Any injury calculated to interfere with health or comfort

Examples include bruises, cuts, or psychological harm.

37
Q

True or False: Psychological harm can be considered ABH.

A

True

Psychological harm can include conditions like PTSD or anxiety disorders.

38
Q

What case involved psychological harm leading to a conviction for ABH?

A

R v Chan-Fook (1944)

The accused was convicted for causing psychological harm by locking the victim in a room.

39
Q

Fill in the blank: Any injury that is not _______ can be considered for ABH.

A

insignificant

40
Q

What type of emotional states are excluded from being classified as psychological harm in ABH cases?

A

Mere emotions like fear, anxiety, distress, or panic

Actual psychological injuries must be more severe.

41
Q

What is a potential psychological injury that may qualify under ABH?

A

Depression or panic attacks

Serious psychological conditions may be considered for ABH.

42
Q

In the case of DPP v Smith, what was the significant action taken by the defendant?

A

Cutting the victim’s ponytail

This action was deemed sufficient to constitute ABH despite the absence of physical injuries.

43
Q

What was the outcome of the appeal in DPP v Smith regarding the cutting of hair?

A

Cutting hair was considered ABH

The appeal confirmed that the act of cutting hair constituted Actual Bodily Harm.

44
Q

In T v DPP (2003), what condition did the victim experience?

A

Loss of consciousness

This was determined to be sufficient for a finding of Actual Bodily Harm.

45
Q

What must be established to determine if there is ABH according to the Chan case?

A

Injury must be more than trivial

The Chan case establishes a standard for assessing the severity of injury in ABH cases.

46
Q

What is the significance of the case R v Savage (1990) in relation to ABH?

A

No mens rea required to cause injury

The case established that a defendant does not need to intend to cause injury for ABH to be applicable, MR for battery was enough

47
Q

True or False: Emotional distress alone is sufficient to claim ABH.

A

False

ABH requires a physical injury rather than mere emotional upset.

48
Q

What was the defendant’s action in the R v Savage case that caused ABH?

A

Threw a glass at the victim

The action of throwing glass was considered reckless and led to a finding of ABH.

49
Q

What is the mens rea of ABH?

A

MR of the assault/battery is enough.
Assault - DI/RECK causing V. to apprehend immediate violence
Battery - DI/RECK applying unlawful force

50
Q

ABH MR case

A

R v Savage
-D. threw beer glass at husbands new GF
-glass slipped, V. hit

MR of battery was enough for ABH

51
Q

ABH Exam skills

A

Identify offence
Define offence
Explain AR of offence eg. assault
Apply AR of offence
Explain AR of ABH
Apply AR of ABH
Explain Causation; factual, legal, intervening acts, TSR
Apply Causation; factual, legal, intervening acts, TSR
Explain MR of offence eg assault + cases
Apply MR of offence
Conclude liability

52
Q

ABH Paragraph

A

I
-D. has committed an ABH against V.
D
-ABH is defined in s47 of the
OAPA 1861 as assault occasioning actual bodily harm.
E
-In order for the D to have
committed the actus reus, there
must be a common assault
that causes some injury.
-Firstly there must be a common assault. This is either an assault or battery. In this case there is a (battery. Battery is the application of unlawful force. / assault. Assault is causing the victim to apprehend immediate personal violence).
-*D. must apply force

53
Q

What is the definition of wounding according to Section 20 of OAPA 1861?

A

Wounding is defined as unlawfully wounding a person

Section 20 pertains to less serious offenses.

54
Q

What distinguishes Section 18 from Section 20 in the context of wounding?

A

Section 18 involves more serious offenses and requires direct or oblique intent

Section 18 is considered more serious than Section 20.

55
Q

What are the two key elements required to prove wounding?

A
  1. Injury classified as a wound
  2. Act has caused the wound
56
Q

What case established the definition of a wound as a break in continuity of skin?

A

JCC v Eisenhower

This case clarified that a wound requires a break in the skin, not just internal bleeding.

57
Q

In the case of JCC v Eisenhower, what was the incident that led to the ruling?

A

An airgun was fired, causing a bloodshot eye without a skin cut.

58
Q

According to legal definitions, what constitutes a wound?

A

A break in continuity of skin involving two layers

Internal bleeding alone does not qualify as a wound.

59
Q

Which MR case is associated with Section 20 of OAPA 1861?

wounding AND GBH

A

R v Mowatt

-D. punched V. over £5 repeatedly
S.20 = direct intent or recklessness to cause some harm

60
Q

Which MR case is associated with Section 18 of OAPA 1861?

wounding AND GBH

A

R v Belfon

-D. slashed V. in the face with a razor
S.18 = direct or oblique intent to cause serious harm

61
Q

Wounding Flowchart

A
62
Q

Wounding Exam Paragraph Structure

A

IDEACEA

I dentity offence
D efine offence
E xplain AR
A pply AR
C ausation - fac/leg
E xplain MR
A pply MR

63
Q

What is GBH defined as in S.20/S.18 OAPA 1861?

A

Unlawful wounding or inflicting GBH (with intent)

GBH stands for Grievous Bodily Harm.

64
Q

What is the actus reus (AR) for proving GBH?

A

Inflicting GBH

65
Q

In the case of DPP v. Smith, what were the outcomes related to GBH?

A

Ordered to stop car, jumped in front and died
GBH = serious, not permenant

66
Q

What is the significance of the case of R v. Brown & Stratton?

A

Accumulation of minor injuries leading to serious harm

-beat up trans, broke teeth and bruised

67
Q

What was the psychological harm in R v. Martin (1881)?

A

Serious psychological harm from placing a bar on an exit
GBH can be indirect

68
Q

In R v. Dica, what was concurred?

A

Had STD, knew, had sex
GBH can be biological harm

69
Q

What type of harm is established in R v. Burstow?

A

Psychological harm

-distributed hate mail to ex’s neighbours

70
Q

What injuries were noted in R v. Bollom?

A

Bruised 17-month-old
age and health considered for GBH

71
Q

Fill in the blank: GBH is defined as _______.

A

Grievous Bodily Harm

72
Q

True or False: GBH must result in permanent injury.

A

False

73
Q

What does the case of R v Martin (1881) illustrate about indirect harm?

A

Injuries caused by panic in a public setting

74
Q

Name a case that involved the accumulation of minor injuries leading to serious harm.

A

R v. Brown & Stratton

75
Q

Examples of GBH level injuries

A

brain damage, broken limbs, paralysis, coma, internal bleeding

76
Q

Alternative MR for both wounding AND GBH

A

S.18 - serious harm
Either:
1. DI/OI (R v Belfon)
2. intention to resist, DI/recklessness to cause harm (R v Morrison)

77
Q

What are the requirements for the alternative MR?

A
  • V must be police officer#
  • D. intends to resist arrest
  • Therefore, dir/reck to cause harm

“because its police = more culpable”

78
Q

Case for alternative MR

A

R v Morrison
D. resisted and saw some harm

-D. held by police, ran through glass
-V. cut and bruised

Law (7 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions