Tort of Trespass to the Person (Unit 1 s.7)

Question 1

Definition of assault?

Answer 1

an intentional act by D causing C to reasonably apprehend the immediate infliction of unlawful force

Question 2

How important is intention in assault?

Answer 2

Intention is essential, otherwise the relevant tort is negligence (Letang v Cooper)

Question 3

Can words constitute an assault?

Can words negate an assault?

Answer 3

o WORDS, as well as actions, may constitute an assault (R v Ireland [1998] – ‘a thing said is a thing done’)

Yes - Words may also negate an assault (Tuberville v Savage) e.g. “if we weren’t being watched…”

Question 4

Definition of immediate?

Answer 4

• ‘Immediate’: means ‘within a minute or so’ (Lord Steyn in R v Ireland)

Question 5

Definition of battery

Answer 5

the intentional application of unlawful force, to another person

Question 6

What constitutes intention for battery?

Answer 6

D must intend only his actions, not the consequences (Wilson v Pringle)

Question 7

How close must causation be to the force?

Answer 7

• ‘Direct application of force’: force must flow almost immediately and without intervention. Physical contact is not necessary

Question 8

In battery, how is physical contact from everyday conduct treated?

Answer 8

• ‘Unlawful force’: physical contact which is generally acceptable in the ordinary conduct of everyday life will not be unlawful (F v West Berkshire Health Authority)

Question 9

What defences are available?

Answer 9

Burden of proof on Claimant to prove defendant has committed trespass. Burden of proof of defence on D.

CONSENT
DEFENCE OF THE PERSON
DEFENCE OF PROPERTY
DEFENCE OF NECESSITY

Question 10

Defence of consent.

Answer 10

1) CONSENT
a. May be implied or express content
b. Medical cases: Chatterton v Gerson: a patient is deemed to have consented to medical treatment once informed in broad terms of the nature of procedure intended
c. Medical cases: Chester v Afshar: a doctor’s failure to disclose risks will NOT invalidate the patient’s consent
d. Sports cases: Condon v Basi: a sports competitor consents not only to all conduct within the rules of the sport, but also to conduct outside the rules, but within the spirit of the sport

Question 11

Defence of the person

Answer 11

2) DEFENCE OF THE PERSON
a. Cockcroft v Smith: D must establish that the force was:
i. Used in self-defence
ii. Reasonable
iii. Proportionate to the force used/threatened by C

Question 12

Defence of property

Answer 12

3) DEFENCE OF PROPERTY
a. One may take reasonable steps to eject a trespasser (which might mean first asking trespasser to leave – Green v Goddard)

Question 13

Necessity defence

Answer 13

4) NECESSITY
a. D must show (1) that a situation of necessity existed, and (2) that his actions were reasonable
i. F v West Berkshire Health Authority: identified 2 situations where defence of necessity could justify treating an adult medically without consent:
1. An emergency situation where the patient is unconscious
2. A state of affairs (e.g. stroke) rendering the patient incapable of giving consent

Question 14

Cooperative Group v Pritchard [2011]

Answer 14

Defendant cannot allege contributory negligence as defence to claims for assault and battery