Offences against the Person Act 1861

Question 1

s.47 Assault Occasioning ABH

Actus Reus

Answer 1

Assault or battery
which causes
Actual bodily harm

Question 2

Occasions taken to mean ‘Which causes’ S&S

Answer 2

Matter of causation must be proved: factual and Legal

Question 3

‘Actual Bodily Harm’

Donovan [1934]

Answer 3

“any hurt or injury calculated to intefere w/he health or comfort of [D]”,provided it was more than transient and trifling.”

Question 4

‘Actual Bodily Harm’

Chan-Fook [1994]

Answer 4

Non-physical harm falls within s. 47 provided that it constitutes some form of pschiatry injurt attested to by expert evidence. Confirmed in Burstow

Question 5

‘Actual Bodily Harm’

Burstow [1998]

Answer 5

Mere fright will not constitute abh, even where a nervous condition is induced, unless there is uncontroverted expert testtimony that V’s state constitutesaform of phsyciatric injury.

Question 6

Mens Rea

Answer 6

Intended or been reckless to the assualt or battery

No mental element w/ res[ect to ocassioning bodily harm.

Question 7

S20 Maliciosly wouds or inflicts GBH

Actus Reus

Answer 7

Unlawful wounding or inflicting any grevious bodily harm

Question 8

Unlawful

Answer 8

Excludes, GBH in self defence, prevention of crime, where the victim consents and chastisemenet of child.

Question 9

Wounding

Moriarty v Brooks [1834]

Answer 9

A wound requires all the layers of the skin to be pierced. even a minor injury like a pin prick.

Question 10

Wounding

JCC V Eisenhower 1984]

Answer 10

Wounding requires external element. Internal ruptures are not wounds.

Question 11

GBH

Metheram [1961]

Answer 11

means “really serious harm”

Dica [2004]- infection by HIV constitutes.

Question 12

GBH

Bollom [2004]`

Answer 12

totality of the injuries shhould be taken into account, it may be that no one particular injury is really serious yet taken as a whole, V’s injuries may amount GBH.

Question 13

Inflict

Answer 13

Synonym for cause - Burstow [1998]

Question 14

Mens Rea

Answer 14

Malice = Intent or recklessness

Cunningham recklessness

Question 15

S.18 Wounding Intent

Answer 15

Creates one offence w/ several modes of comission

a. Unlawfully and maliciously wounding:
- > (i)with intent to do GBH; or
- >(ii)w/ inent to resist or prevent the lawful apprehension or detainer of any person.
b. Unlawfully and maliciously causing GBH:
- > (i) Intent to do GBH
- >(ii) w Intent to resist or precent the lawful apprehension or detainer or any peron.

Question 16

Mens Rea

Answer 16

Intention - In modes a(i), a(ii) , b(ii) this is an ulterior intent.

Only direct intent to cause GBH can be found. NO WOOLLIN!! in a(i) and a(ii)

b(i)- direct and oblique test used
a(ii) and b(ii) - D must intend to resist an apprehension or detention.
What is mens rea for lawfulness? D know that apprehension was lawful? seems like it.

Question 17

Criticism

Answer 17

->Horder criticises the simplicity of the language, and would prefer a more specific wording of the statute as this would accurately define the conduct and the harm.

Question 18

Commentary

Ashworth Principles

Answer 18

use of inflict,creates vagueness on requirement of causation. ALso the lack of mental element for causing ABH- gives rise to the question why separate act from assault or Battery?

Question 19

Commentary

S& S

Answer 19

S&S S20 consider wounding alongside GBH- which may well involve diff magnitude of harm

Question 20

Law Commision: Legislating the Criminal Code: Offences Against the Person and General Principles

Answer 20

The structure of the offences can also be criticised. There is no statutory definition of assault or battery and there are no clear boundaries between the offences