Trespass to Person

Question 1

Trespass

Answer 1

The wrongful direct interference with another person, or with his possession of land or with his goods.

Question 2

Trespass to the person

Answer 2

Any direct and immediate interference with a person’s freedom (which includes freedom of movement).

Question 3

3 types of trespass to the person

Answer 3

Assault
Battery
False Imprisonment

Question 4

Assault

Answer 4

An act which directly and intentionally causes plaintiff to fear that a battery will be immediately inflicted on him.

Collins v Wilcock

Question 5

Two rules for assault

Answer 5

Must be intentional – R v Ireland

Must cause plaintiff to reasonably fear battery – Thomas v National Union of Mineworkers

Question 6

R v Ireland

Answer 6

Dude was carrying out silent phone calls to several victims. Court ruled that silence can amount to an assault.

“There is no reason why something said should be incapable of causing an apprehension of immediate personal violence”.

Question 7

Thomas v National Union of Mineworkers

Answer 7

Claimant must believe that a tortious act is possible and will be carried out.

Question 8

Battery

Answer 8

Direct and intentional application of physical force to another person.

Question 9

Battery must be intentional:

Answer 9

Letang v Cooper

Question 10

Letang v Cooper

Answer 10

Defendant accidently drove over claimants’ legs whilst she was sunbathing. She was unable to recover damages as actions were accidental.

Question 11

Is there a requirement that battery must cause harm?

Answer 11

No, Cole v Turner

Question 12

Cole v Turner

Answer 12

Held that touching in anger is a battery.

Question 13

False imprisonment

Answer 13

An act which intentionally and without lawful justification restrains a persons liberty.

Question 14

False imprisonment must be total:

Answer 14

Bird v Jones

Question 15

Bird v Jones

Answer 15

Claimant partially crossed a bridge when it was closed. He claimed his freedom was blocked and this amounted to false imprisonment.

Court ruled:

There was only a partial restraint of freedom. Although he could not move forward, he could retrace his steps.

Question 16

A person doesn’t have to be aware that they are falsely imprisoned:

Answer 16

Murray v Minister of Defence

Question 17

Murray v Minister of Defence

Answer 17

HL ruled

“No requirement that a person should be aware of the fact of denial of liberty…however, if a person is unaware that he has been falsely imprisoned and has suffered no harm, he can expect to recover no more than nominal damages”.

Question 18

Defences to false imprisonment

Answer 18

Lawful arrest
Reasonable condition for release
Medical detention

Question 19

Defences to assault and battery

Answer 19

Self-defence 
Parental authority (must be proportionate to child’s behaviour)
Consent