- Non-fatals Against A Person

Question 1

Read v Coker 1853

Answer 1

FACTS- D and his men surrounded V and threatened to ‘break his neck’ if he didn’t leave’

RATIO- Considered an assault as the conditions attached to the threat were not enough to nullify it

AR/MR?- AR complete as D caused fear to V. Does not matter they offered him the opportunity to walk away

Question 2

Ireland and Burstow 1997

Answer 2

FACTS- D carries out 8 months of harassment, V suffered from severe depression as a consequence of this

RATIO- An assault can consist of any act causing the V to apprehend an immediate application of force upon them

AR/MR?- Act/words must cause V to apprehend immediate that immediate force is going to be used against them

Question 3

Logdon 1976

Answer 3

FACTS- D pointed an imitation gun at V. D said it was not real

RATIO- Assault committed as V threatened and V apprehended immediate unlawful personal violence

AR/MR?- Assault requires some act or words. what amounts to an act?

Question 4

Lamb 1967

Answer 4

FACTS- D thought gun was safe. Gun went off killing V

RATIO- No assault as V did not fear- he believed the gun to be safe

AR/MR?- AR- V must apprehend immediate unlawful force upon them for an assault

Question 5

Ramos 2000

Answer 5

FACTS- D distributed racist letters threatening a bomb attack

RATIO- Initially acquitted due to a lack of immediacy the decision was reversed on appeal to state the key ingredient should be the fear on V. As their fear is the main ingredient for assault to have been committed.

AR/MR?- AR- there must be an apprehension of immediate unlawful force on V for there to be an assault

Question 6

Smith v Chief Super Intendent of Wokin Police Station 1983

Answer 6

FACTS- D frightened V by looking through her bedroom window- she was terrified although there was means of entry for D into the property

RATIO- Court held V was frightened by D. V did not know what D was going to do next, but it was likely to be violent conduct- assault stands

AR/MR?- AR- there must be an immediate apprehension of unlawful force on V for assault to stand

Question 7

Constanza 1997

Answer 7

FACTS- D stalked a lady he developed an infuriation with, wrote over 800 letters and waited outside of her workplace

RATIO- Charged with ABH S.47 OAPA, Judy we’re entitled in the circumstances to find that immediacy was present and words can amount to assault

AR/MR?- AR- the interpretation of immediate is loose

Question 8

Mohan 1976

Answer 8

FACTS- D drove his car at a police officer, police officer was not hit- attempted ABH (NG). D lacked intent for the attempt

RATIO- D’s aim or purpose was to bring about the assault is the key ingredient in MR (direct intent)

AR/MR?- MR- intention to cause another to fear immediate unlawful violence is MR for assault

Question 9

Cunningham 1957

Answer 9

FACTS- D tore the gas meter off the wall and has seeped into his neighbours house- she became unwell

RATIO- D was reckless as to whether such harm should occur to V or not

AR/MR?- MR- recklessness is sufficient for MR for assault

Question 10

Collins and Willock 1984

Answer 10

FACTS- D was a police officer trying to hold a women for her identity, V scratched D to free herself

RATIO- D (police officer) committed battery as he was not acting under his duty as he wasn’t arresting her

AR/MR?- AR- “Force” can be as light as a touch

Question 11

DPP v K 1990

Answer 11

FACTS- D took acid from school lesson and hid it in hand dryer in fear of being caught, V used hand dryer and got hurt by acid

RATIO- D charged of assault but appealed as he didn’t intend to hurt V. Prosecution appealed and said a common assault can be caused by an INDIRECT ACT

AR/MR?- AR- an indirect act can amount to a assault contributing to battery

Question 12

DPP v Santana-Bermudez 2003

Answer 12

FACTS- V was a policewomen searching D. V asked if there was any needles/something that can harm her in D’s pockets. D said no and upon search, V was stabbed

RATIO- Divisional Court held that V’s failure to tell D of the needle could amount to the AR doe the purposes of assault. D was charged

AR/MR?- AR- an omission can cause liability for an assault

Question 13

Fagan v MPC 1969

Answer 13

FACTS- D accidentally parked on V’s foot. When V told him to move D failed to for serveral minutes

RATIO- HOL set the definition of assault. D was charged of battery as it was a continuing act. At the start when he drove on his foot by accident, and he then drove off he wouldn’t be guilty

AR/MR?- AR- a continuing act can amount to an assault/battery

Question 14

Miller 1954

Answer 14

FACTS- D threw his wife to the floor on multiple occasions and raped her

RATIO- “Actual bodily harm includes any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of the Victim”

AR/MR- There has to have been an assault which amounted to ABH for a ABH charge

Question 15

T v DPP 2003

Answer 15

FACTS- V was chased by a group of youths, he fell and covered his head. He was kicked and suffered a short loss of consciousness

RATIO- D was concocted of assault occasioning ABH

AR/MR?- AR- “losing consciousness can amount to ABH” - What is ABH?

Question 16

DPP v Smith 2006

Answer 16

FACTS- D broke into his ex-girlfriends house and cut off her ponytail

RATIO- Cutting V’s hair can amount to ABH. The harm must be actual it cannot be small and trivial

AR/MR?- “cutting hair” can amount to ABH- Proving ABH has occurred

Question 17

Chan Fook 1994

Answer 17

FACTS- V struck D many times. Locked V in room, V tried to escape via window but fell, suffering injuries as a consequence

RATIO- Conviction quashed- “To amount ABH, the injury need not be permanent but should not be so trivial to be wholly significant”

AR/MR?- injury cannot be so trivial to be wholly significant

Question 18

DPP v K 1990- ABH CASE TYPE

Answer 18

FACTS- D places acid in a hand dryer and V used the hand dryer. His hands were burnt by the acid

RATIO- Charged of ABH was acquitted as he didn’t intend to harm anyone. Queens bench ruled assault can be committed by an indirect act

AR/MR- an indirect act can amount to an assault

Question 19

Cunningham 1957- ABH TYPE CASE

Answer 19

FACTS- D tore glass meter off wall and gas seeped into his neighbours house- neighbour became unwell

RATIO- D was reckless as to whether such harm could occur or not

AR/MR?- MR- D must intend or be subjectively reckless as to where V fears or is subjected to unlawful force

Question 20

Savage and Parmenter

Answer 20

FACTS- D threw a drink at V, glass slipped cutting V’s wrist

RATIO- it is unnecessary that the accused should either, have intended or foreseen his act may have caused GBH

AR/MR?- MR- D does not have to intend or be reckless about causing ABH

Question 21

JCC v Eisenhower 1984

Answer 21

FACTS- The V was hit in the eye with a shotgun pellet. This did not penetrate the eye but did cause server bleeding under the surface

RATIO- Even a broken bone is not considered a wound, unless the skin is broken as well

AR/MR?- AR- What is a wound? There has to be a cut or break in continuity of the whole skin for there to be a ‘wound’ contributing to the AR of s.20 GBH

Question 22

Morlarty v Brookes 1834

Answer 22

FACTS- The D was a publican. He argued with a customer over a disputed payment and struck him causing a cut below his eye. The publican argues he asked the V to leave and he has refused to do so and the force was lawfully applied ejecting him from the pub

RATIO- Wounding requires both layers of skin to be broken

AR/MR?- Did D wound V?

Question 23

Wood 1830

Answer 23

FACTS- The victims collarbone was broken but the skin was intact

RATIO- A broken bone is not a wound

AR/MR?- AR- what must break to demonstrate a wound? The skin

Question 24

Cunningham 1957- GBH CASE TYPE

Answer 24

FACTS- D tore the gas meter off the wall. Gas seeped into neighbours house, neighbour became unwell

RATIO- ‘maliciously’ simply means an intention to do the particular kind of harm that was done, or RECKLESSNESS as to whether such harm should occur or not

AR/MR?- AR + MR- Is recklessness classed as “malicious”

Question 25

DPP v Smith 1961

Answer 25

FACTS- Policeman tried to stop D driving off with stolen goods by jumping on his car bonnet. D zigzagged to throw police officer off his car, police officer was hit by an oncoming car when falling off D’s car and died

RATIO- GBH means really serious harm

AR/MR?-MR- intention for GBH is now a subjective test. The old objective test does not apply

Question 26

Lewis 1974

Answer 26

FACTS- D shouted threats to his wife through the door of a second floor window. She was scared and jumped out breaking both legs

RATIO- A technical assault or battery is not always needed- infliction I’d harm can be broadly interpreted

AR/MR?- AR- Inflict has a very broad meaning

Question 27

Parmenter 1991

Answer 27

FACTS- D threw his child in the air and broke more than one limb

RATIO- D must at least see some harm may result

AR/MR?- MR- Subjective recklessness. D must foresee the harm

Question 28

Burstow 1994 S.20 GBH CASE

Answer 28

FACTS- D carried out an 8 month harassment against V. Including silent and abusive phone calls, hate mail and stalking. This caused V to suffer from severe depression. D was convicted of S.20 OAPA

RATIO- It only needs to be shown that D’s actions have led to the consequence of V suffering GBH

AR/MR?- AR- What classes as grevious bodily harm

Question 29

Dica 2004

Answer 29

FACTS- D has consensual inter course with the two V’s but failed to inform them he was HIV positive, both V’s contracted HIV

RATIO- giving someone a disease knowingly can amount to GBH

AR/MR?- AR- Biological GBH can amount to S.20

Question 30

Bollom 2003

Answer 30

FACTS- A 17 month old child had bruising to her abdomen, arms and legs. D was convicted of GBH s.20

RATIO- Bruising like in Bollom, on an adult would be less serious

AR/MR?- What is Grievous Bodily Harm?