offences against a person act Flashcards
assault occasioning actual bodily harm
s47 of oatpa 1861
ar
ar
AR of common assault that causes victim to suffer actual bodily harm.
Actual Bodily Harm: Any hurt or injury that interferes with health or comfort of the victim - Miller, Donovan.
Can be physical or psychological - Chan Fook, Ireland (includes psychiatric injury).
Direct or indirect - Martin, Halstead.
Cutting off a substantial amount of hair is sufficient - DPP v Smith.
Momentary loss of consciousness is sufficient - R (T) v DPP.
assault occasioning actual bodily harm
s47 of oatpa 1861
mr
Intention or subjective recklessness regarding the assault or battery.
No need to foresee the level of injury - Savage.
Unlawful and Malicious Inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm (Section 20 Offences Against the Person Act 1861)
Infliction of grievous bodily harm (GBH).
wound - Defined as a cut or break in all layers of the skin - Eisenhower.
gbh - serious harm - dpp v smith
- assessment of severity includes v’s age and health - bollom
Serious psychiatric injury is sufficient - Burstow.
Inflicting diseases like HIV can constitute GBH - Dica,
D’s actions must lead to serious harm; causation is required - Burstow.
Unlawful and Malicious Inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm (Section 20 Offences Against the Person Act 1861)
Intention or subjective recklessness to wound or cause GBH.
must foresee some harm, but not necessarily grievous bodily harm - Grimshaw
gbh s18 of oatpa act
1861
ar
Unlawfully wounding or causing grievous bodily harm to any person.
“Cause” is broadly interpreted and includes acts that are a substantial cause of the wound/GBH.
gbh s18 of oatpa act
1861
mr
Requires intention to cause grievous bodily harm or to resist lawful apprehension or detainer of another.
Recklessness is insufficient for this specific intent.
development of aopa
- developed through cases
-created inconsitinces and confusion esp w the team bodily harm
-may then struggle with understanding what the law means by the word harm
failing to consider things of todays harm
- fail to include things like psychiartic injuries ( mental health problems ) and infectious diseases
- meaning law may not provide enough protection for victims who have dealt with this type of harm
confusing language
- s20 and 18
- maliciously in s20 and 18, misleading , actually refers to intention and subjective recklessness, not to have bad intentions
- same w grievous , outdated and can be hard to understand in todays world
- harder for people to understand what law means
similar sentences for gbh and abh but different levels of harm
- both have same max of 5 years
- types of injuries are diff though, from minor wounds , to very serious harm for gbh
- meaning prosecutors have to decide which charge to use, lead to inconsitiences in how cases are handled
reforms for oapa
- 1998 draft bill and call commission reports suggested reforms to improve clarity and understanding
- Clause 1: Intentional Serious Injury to replace Section 18 GBH.
Clause 2: Reckless Serious Injury to replace Section 20 GBH, with a maximum imprisonment of 7 years.
Clause 3: Intentional or Reckless Injury to replace Section 47 ABH, maintaining a maximum of 5 years.
Clause 4: A single offence combining assault and battery under current provisions.
benefits of reform 1
- clearer definitions for actus and mens rea
- help ensure that each level of harm and level of blame are properly recognised
- law would then be easier to understand and apply consistently
benefit 2
- gets rid of archai terms, making law more easier to understand
benefit 3
- reform would lay out specific elements for each offence, making rules easy to understand
- helps get rid of confusion, leads to unfair results in legal cases
