Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

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


See full index

Law paper 1 > Non Fatal Offences (CL book 4) > Flashcards

Non Fatal Offences (CL book 4) Flashcards

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

ASSULT steps to success

A

intro - define (common law defence - sentence in s.39 Crim justice act 2009)
1. must be an act
2. made v aiuf
3. immediate
4. MR intends for v to aiuf
5. MR reckless for making v fear aiuf

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

ASSULT what section and act is it under

A

s.39 criminal justice act 1988

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

ASSULT what is the AR

A

must be an act
causes v to apprehend immediate unlawful force

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

ASSULT what is the mr

A

intention or subjective recklessness to cause v to fear violence

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

ASSULT what is the case that showed words can be an assult

A

constanta
words can be an act

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

ASSULT which cases showed silence can be an assult

A

Ireland / burstow
silence / heavy breathing can amount to an act

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

ASSULT which case showed words can cancel out an assult

A

Tuberville v savage

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

ASSULT which case showed what immediate meant

A

Smith
immediate means imminent

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

ASSULT which case showed the MR includes recklessness

A

Logdon V DPP
fake gun at woman

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

BATTERY steps to success

A

intro - s.39 cja 1988 - common law offence
1. AR - act or omission
2. AR - unlawful force
3. AR - direct/ indirect
4. MR - intent for unlawful force
5. MR - reckless for unlawful force

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

BATTERY section and act

A

s.39 criminal justice act 1988

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

BATTERY what is the AR

A

application of unlawful force on another person

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

BATTERY what is the MR

A

intention or subjective recklessness to apply the force

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

BATTERY which case showed that battery can be an omission

A

Santa bermudez
didn’t tell police about needle

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

BATTERY which case showed that battery can be indirect

A

DPP V K
acid in in hand dryer

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

BATTERY which case showed that force can be touching clothes

A

Thomas
touching a persons clothes while they’re wearing them is the same as touching the person

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

BATTERY what is the case for MR

A

Fagan
MR after AR if continuing act

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

ASSULT / BATTERY EVALUATION 3Ps

A

p - no act of parliament
d - against rule of law as it’s uncertain and how can ppl regulate
h- parliament recognised to set out max sentence, so must be ok w it

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

ASSULT / BATTERY EVALUATION
delevopment of law

A

p- common law. developed by judges. up to date
d- defined mr and ar . includes modern day stalking (constanza) (ireland/ burstow). and indirect acts
h- should be parliament defining them, but judges been doing it for years and are fine, maybe better

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

ASSULT / BATTERY EVALUATION
sentencing

A

p- max 6 months or fine. protects ppl
d- unlimited fine. link to ds income. (smith - homeless)
h- maybe more appropriate for community sentence as vs had no actual harm done

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

ASSULT / BATTERY EVALUATION
justice - outdated

A

p- outdated language confusing
d - assult and battery sound more violent in modern terms when it actually includes slight touch (thomas)
h- legal personnel have good understanding and can explain it to people when necessary

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

ASSULT / BATTERY EVALUATION
flexible

A

p- judges can develop it to reflect modern life
d- dpp v k where magistrates didn’t think it could be indirect, then it was changed as hcj thought it could
h- can make it unclear, against rule of law

23
Q

ASSULT / BATTERY EVALUATION
tests

A

p- mr includes recklessness
d- fair on d and is subjective (cunningham) - justified risk test
h- ar isn’t that clear as it can include touching clothes for battery or slight touch for assult

24
Q

ABH steps to success

A

intro - common law, oapa 1861
1. AR - assult or battery
2. AR- occasioning ABH
3. ABH definition
4. MR - intent for assult/ /battery
5. MR reckless for assult / battery

25
Q

ABH section and act

A

s.47 OAPA 1861

26
Q

ABH what is the AR of ABH

A

assult or battery that causes actual bodily harm

27
Q

ABH what is the MR for ABH

A

intention or subjective recklessness for the original assult or battery

28
Q

ABH what is the definition of ABH

A

jury or injury that interferes with the health or comfort of V

29
Q

ABH what are the cases showing abh includes psychiatric harm

A

constanza
ireland

30
Q

ABH what case shows it can be indirect

A

DPP V K

31
Q

ABH what case shows coincidence

A

Fagan

32
Q

ABH what case shows physical pain isn’t necessary

A

Smith

33
Q

ABH which case shows it can be loss of consciousness

A

T V DPP

34
Q

WOUNDING / GBH Steps to success

A

intro - s.20 and s.18 OAPA 1861
1. define wounding
2.define gbh
3. AR
4. MR - s.20
5. MR - s.18

35
Q

WOUNDING / GBH what is the definition of wounding

A

breaking both layers of skin

36
Q

WOUNDING / GBH what is the definition of gbh

A

serious harm

37
Q

WOUNDING / GBH what is the AR

A

d must wound or cause gbh on the v

38
Q

WOUNDING / GBH what is the MR for s.20

A

intention or recklessness for some harm

39
Q

WOUNDING / GBH what is the MR for s.18

A

intention for serious harm
intention to resist lawful arrest

40
Q

WOUNDING / GBH what is the case that shows it must break both layers of skin

A

Eisenhower

41
Q

WOUNDING / GBH what are the 2 cases for wounding

A

Eisenhower
Brown

42
Q

WOUNDING / GBH what are the 2 cases for transmitting disease

A

Dica - didn’t tell vs
Rowe - intentionally

43
Q

WOUNDING / GBH what case shows it can include psychiatric harm

A

Burstow

44
Q

WOUNDING / GBH what is the case for MR

A

Taylor
intended to scratch v , not serious harm

45
Q

WOUNDING / GBH what is the case for resisting arest

A

morrison

46
Q

OAPA EVALUATION 3ps disadvantage

A

p- doesn’t define abh, goes against parliamentary sovereignty
d- makes it uncertain and hard to interpret. DPP v smith, how would ppl know hair cutting
h- they did recognise it and set out sentence

47
Q

OAPA EVALUATION 3ps advantage

A

p- explains mr and ar gbh and wounding, supports sovereignty
d- sets out mr, makes it certain and ppl aware it includes recklessness
h- doesn’t define wound or gbh. have to look at case law like eisenhower to see break both layers

48
Q

OAPA EVALUATION development of law

A

p- judges develop it, up to date w modern life
d- included psyc harm as it was not understood in 1800s. ireland / burstow, fair for vs
h- parliament should be making it and judges interpret

49
Q

OAPA EVALUATION sentencing

A

p- most ds guilty will go to prison, protects public from ppl like rowe case
d- sentence reflects seriousness, s.18 most serious and has max life
h- s.20 gbh /wounding meant to be more serious than abh but they have the same max sentance

50
Q

OAPA EVALUATION justice morals

A

p- outdated language is confusing, words have diff meaning today
d- refers to penal servitude which doesn’t exist now. says malicious referring to MR of intent or recklessness, but today that means mean intent. law uncertain
h- legal ppl can explain it to clients when needed and have been dealing with it well for years

51
Q

OAPA EVALUATION flexible

A

p-judges change it to reflect changing morals in society and deal w new issues
d-hiv wasn’t a known disease when oapa was first made, judges developed law to include transmitted diseases like in Dica and Rowe
h- can make law unclear which goes against principle rule of law stating it should be certain

52
Q

OAPA EVALUATION tests

A

p- mr includes recklessness, d can still be guilty for seriously injuring someone even if they didn’t desire that outcome
d- fair as test for recklessness is subjective. say unjustified risk test
f- also includes resisting arrest if that causes an injury, which makes it fairer and protects police officers (morrison)

53
Q

how do you identify which NFO it is

A

assult - no touching - no injury - scared or frightened
battery - touching - no injury
ABH - threat or touch - some injury like minor bruising, to broken nose, psychological - doesn’t need pain
GBH - threat or touch - severe psyc, severe injury like broken bones, internal bleeding
Wounding - touch - break both layers of skin - shows by gash, stitches, butterfly clips, bleeding

Law paper 1 (10 decks)

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