Non-fatal offences ( paper 1 part b) Flashcards
NFOs are…
Offences Against the Person Act 1861 (OAPA 1861)
assualt is a…
non-touching offence
battery is a…
touching offence
s47 OAPA 1861 is…
actual bodily harm (ABH)
s20 OAPA 1861 is…
grievous bodily harm (GBH) without intention
s18 OAPA 1861 is…
grievous bodily harm (GBH) with intention
AR of assualt
causing V to apprehend the immediate application of unlawful physical force or violence
MR of assualt
intention or subjective recklessness as to causing V to apprehend the immediate application of unlawful physical force or violence
AR of battery
the application of unlawful force
MR of battery
intention or subjective recklessness as to applying unlawful force or violence
AR of s47 OAPA 1861
AR of either assualt or battery occasioning in actual bodily harm
MR of s47 OAPA 1861
MR of either assualt or battery
AR of s20 OAPA 1861
unlawfully wound or inflict any grievous bodily harm
MR of s20 OAPA 1861
to be reckless or to intend some harm
AR of s18 OAPA 1861
to cause unlawful wound or GBH
MR of s18 OAPA 1861
specific intention to cause GBH or specific intention to resist arrest
Constanza
words can amount to assualt
Ireland
silence can amount to assualt
Tuberville v Savage
words can negate an assualt
Smith
V fearing physical attack in the imminent future was enough
Logdon
D had at least been reckless
Faulkner v Talbot
‘Force’- there is no need to prove harm or pain, a mere touch is sufficient
Collins v Willcock
everyday allowances had to be made
Thomas
slightest touch constitutes a battery even if there was no application of force
DPP v Khan
amounted to a battery as there was indirect force applied
Fagan
battery can’t be committed through omission
Mohan
Woollin
Cunningham
Miller
ABH is ‘ any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of V’
Chan-Fook
injury should…not be so trivial as to be insignificant
T v DPP
momentary loss of consciousness amounts to an ABH
Smith
ABH extends to hurt and damage so long as it isn’t trivial ( harm doesn’t necessarily mean pain)
R v D
psychiatric harm
-Constanza
-Ireland
Roberts
D doesn’t have to foresee the harm
Savage
D doesn’t have to foresee the actual harm
Martin
Although D didn’t have a specific V in mind, blocking the fire exit and shouting ‘fire’, D had indirect application of force
Burstow
GBH can be inflicted in the form of psychiatric damage and no physical force had to be present
Saunders
doesn’t have to be life threatening
Brown and Stratton
a collection of s47 injuries can amount to GBH
Bollom
severity of injuries will be assessed according to v’s age and health
Burstow
serious psychological harm constitutes a GBH
Dica
biological harm is also GBH
Eisenhower
injury wasn’t sufficient to constitute a wound as both layers of the skin hadn’t been broken
Mowatt
it’s enough to have foreseen some physical harm to V
Belfon
D had certainly foreseen the risk of such consequences, but couldn’t prove he had specific intent-reduced to s20
Taylor
intention to wound wasn’t sufficient for MR of s18
Assualt & Battery sentence…
6 months per offence
s47 &s20 sentence…
5 years
s18 sentence…
life