Trespass to the person

Question 1

True or False

A defendant must physically touch a plaintiff in order for a battery to occur

Answer 1

False

A battery can occur when the defendant makes contact with the plaintiff via an object under the defendant’s control.

Question 2

True or False
Dr Lee gives Sue a COVID-19 vaccination without Sue’s consent. However, there is no battery because Dr Lee did not intend to hurt Sue, only to help her.

Answer 2

False
The defendant must intend to make contact with the plaintiff, but any touching of another person’s body without their consent (or other lawful defence) is a battery. An intention to hurt the plaintiff is not a requirement of the tort

Question 3

True or False
“Implied consent” is another term for the exception to battery created for conduct that is generally acceptable in everyday life.

Answer 3

False
In Re F, Lord Goff explicitly made a distinction between implied or express consent, which is a defence to battery, and the exception for contact generally acceptable in everyday life. In the second case, a tort is not considered to have occurred at all.

Question 4

Which of the following is NOT an element of the tort of assault?

1. There must be a threat by the defendant of imminent unlawful contact
2. The plaintiff must suffer some form of physical harm
3. The defendant must intend to make contact with the plaintiff, or must intend to create an apprehension of imminent contact in the mind of the plaintiff
4. The threat by the defendant must create an (objectively reasonable) apprehension of imminent contact in the mind of the plaintiff

Answer 4

2 -
While Justice Hargrave in Chetcuti states that the tort of assault requires that the plaintiff’s apprehension of unlawful contact causes injury, loss or damage to the plaintiff, it is well established that trespass to the person (including assault) is actionable per se.

Question 5

The case of _______ v _______ is an example of where the court held that a conditional threat WAS an assault.

Answer 5

Police v Greaves

Question 6

Which of the cases below involved the plaintiff being confined on a boat by the defendant without reasonable means of escape?

1. Burton v Davies
2. Symes v Mahon
3. Balmain New Ferry v Robertson
4. R v Macquarie

Answer 6

4. R v Macquarie

Question 7

The Australian case of _______ v _______ is authority for the principle that false imprisonment can take place either by confining the plaintiff in a physical location or by a total submission by the plaintiff to the will of the defendant

Answer 7

Symes v Mahon

Question 8

Which of the following statements best summarises the legal position on whether there can be a contractual restraint on a person’s liberty?

1. It is clearly established that there can never be a contractual restraint on a person’s liberty
2. English case law establishes that it is possible to restrain someone in order to enforce a contract and Australian lawyers should follow this position
3. Canadian case law clearly establishes that a person cannot be restrained in order to enforce a contract, and Australian lawyers should follow this position
   Correct!
4. There is some Australian authority for the position that it is possible to detain someone in order to enforce a reasonable term in a contract as to exiting private premises

Answer 8

4 -
Balmain New Ferry suggests that in Australian law, it is possible to detain someone in order to enforce a reasonable term in a contract as to exiting private premises

Question 9

True or False

It is false imprisonment if I am sitting in my office and someone comes and locks the door without my knowledge

Answer 9

False