Tort Law Flashcards
Which authority established that one of the conditions for a battery is that the defendants act must be intentional?
Letang v Cooper. In this case there was no battery because the defendants act to drive over the claimants legs with a jaguar was not an intentional act.
Which case established that ‘the least touching of another in anger is a battery?’
Cole v Turner. In this case is was adjudged that if one man intentionally applies force directly to another, however little force was directed. The plaintiff has a cause of action in assault and battery.
Which other establishes that an act must be intentional in order to suffice as a battery claim?
Fowler v Lanning. This case summarised the law of intention; (I) Trespass to a person does not lie if the injury to the plaintiff, although the direct consequence of the act of the defendant, was caused unintentionally and without negligence on the defendants part.
Outline the Fagan v Commissioner of Metropolitan Police case. What does the case illustrate?
Fagan (defendant) unintentionally drove his car onto PC Morris’s foot. When asked to move, Fagan initially refused and turned off his engine. After being requested to move after several times, he reluctantly acquiesced. The plaintiff was able to claim a remedy because a car touching the foot of a person was considered to be a direct act and it was an intentional one in the end.This case established the precedent that 1) a battery can result from an unintentional act which upon continuance becomes intentional. 2) The requirement that battery is a direct act does not mean that the defendant has to use his body to inflict the battery, but can use something else, in is case, a car.
Which authority established that the ‘directness requirement’ of an act is a flexible principle and that a chain of events from the original act can satisfy the directness requirement?
Scott v Shepherd. the defendant was found to have committed a battery against the victim by throwing a lighted firework onto another persons market stall. The firework was actually thrown from stall to stall before landing on the stall of an unfortunate victim.
Which authorities conjectured that any physical contact amounts to ‘force’ in this context of a battery?
Letang v Cooper.
Cole v Turner - “The least touching of another in anger is a battery.”
R v Cotesworth - Spitting was held to be an application of force.
Which legal rule established that in some cases there is a further requirement of hostility for an act to constitute a battery?
Wilson v Pringle. In this case it was ruled that the defendants actions lacked hostility. Pulling the bag off the school kids shoulder amounted to ordinary horseplay between pupils of the same school. It was ruled that touching must be proved to be hostile touching.
How would you define hostile behaviour? Apply the relevant legal authorities to supplement your answer.
Hostility cannot be equated to ill will or malevolence. (Wilson v Pringle) One possible interpretation is that the act must be something to which the claimant would not have consented. (Collins v Wilcock) deliberate touching that was considered to be acting unlawfully. (Collins v Wilcock).
What other case can be applied to the hostility requirement?
Tuberville v Savage. In this case the defendant clapped his hand upon his sword and said to the plaintiff, “ if it were not for assize time, I would not be able to take such language.” The court ruled that there was no threat and accordingly no assault. This case is authority that there must be not only a deliberate threat (in an assault) and deliberate touching (in a battery) but also hostile behaviour.
Which authority can be applied when there is a hostile act inflicted on the claimant to which he/ she consented to?
Rex v Donovan. In this case the appellant, in private, beat a girl of 17 years of age for purposes of sexual gratification, with her consent. The act had about it an aggressive element. The court held that consent was immaterial. This case constituted hostile behaviour and therefore constituted a battery.
Engaging in sado-masochism of the grossest kind, involving inter alia, physical torture. Does this constitute hostile behaviour?
Yes. (Reg v Brown).Again consent was Immaterial in this case as their was a hostile act.
Which authority established that if a claimant understood the general nature of the operations and it was this that she consented, so the operations were not a battery?
Chatterton v Gerson. The patient was informed in broad terms of the nature of the procedure in an operation which is intended, and gives her consent, that consent is real, and the cause of action on which to base a claim for failure to go into risks and implications is negligence, not trespass. If the patient has been given an explanation as to what is involved, their consent will be real. (The explanation in this case being that there would be an intrathecal injection of phenol nerve block).
A boy is admitted to hospital for tonsillectomy and due to administrative error was circumcised instead. Does this case constitute a trespass?
Yes. (Mr Justice Bristow from Chatterton v Gerson) Even though he was as much the victim of error as the boy.
What conditions need to be established in order for there to be a claim in battery?
The claimant must prove that there has been a direct and intentional application of force, arguably with some degree of hostility, to which the claimant has not consented.
Which authority defines Assault and what is the definition?
R v Dennis John Beasley. “Any act by which D intentionally or recklessly, causes P to apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence.”
Which case established that an assault can be committed through silence?
R v Ireland. In this case it was adjudged that menacing silence can amount to assault where it causes the victim to apprehend immediate harm, through this medium of communication.(telephone) The silent caller intends by his silence to cause fear and he is so understood. The victim is assailed by uncertainty about his intentions. Fear may dominate her emotions and it may be the fear that the callers arrival at her door is imminent. She may fear the possibility of immediate personal violence. Therefore a threatening silence can constitute an assault.