Trespass To The Person

Question 1

Battery

Answer 1

Intentional direct application of unlawful force to another person.
Actionable per se
Must be a direct application of force, but does not have to involve physical contact.

Question 2

Assault

Answer 2

Intentional act by D that causes another person to reasonably apprehend immediate affliction of battery upon him
Actionable per se
D does not have to intent C to apprehend the infliction of battery.

Question 3

F v West Berkshire Health Authority

Answer 3

Lord Goff: conduct which is generally acceptable in the conduct of everyday life is excepted.
Treatment without consent in an emergency/ incapable of giving consent is a defense - sought permission to sterilize a woman with the mental age of 5 so she wouldn’t come to harm by falling pregnant.

Question 4

Wilson v Pringle

Answer 4

Hostility may be imported from the circumstances: qn of fact not intention
Authority for definition of battery

Question 5

R v Ireland

Answer 5

Assault can be by words alone

Question 6

Wilkinson v Downton

Answer 6

Created new cause of action.
The D said something untrue to C, intending to shock her.
Must suffer recognised illness or injury.
Intention to shock -> illness in C and it was allowed

Question 7

Chatterton v Gerson

Answer 7

Consent defense.
Operation blocking her sensory nerve => side effect.
Had consented to the broad nature of the medical procedure even though she had a side effect she had not been informed of.
If the procedure had been completely different to the one the C had agreed to then may have a claim in battery.

Question 8

Cockcroft v Smith

Answer 8

Defence of the person:
Not retaliation
Reasonable
Proportionate to that used or threatened

Question 9

Condon v Basi

Answer 9

Consent in sport
(also unlawful force)
Accept some injury but not that which occurs outside the rules of the game
level of care varies depending on the league of the player (higher is greater care)

Question 10

Thomas v NUM

Answer 10

No immediacy of assault threat (miners)

Question 11

Tuberville v Savage

Answer 11

Can only reasonably apprehend if conscious: not asleep

Words can negate assault (conditional threat)

Question 12

Letang v Cooper

Answer 12

Lord Cooper said both assault and battery require intentional contact.

Question 13

Defences

Answer 13

• Consent (sport and medicine)
• Lawful arrest but only with reasonable force
• Defense of the person
• Reasonable steps to defend property
• Necessity