Unit 2: Non-fatal offences against the person Flashcards
R v Ireland
Assault (s39 CJA) - AR - Any conduct (Conduct) - Words alone suffice/silence ‘depends on facts’
Read v Coker
Assault (s39 CJA) - AR - Apprehension of immediate unlawful personal force - The threat of unlawful personal force could be conditional
R v Burstow
Assault (s39 CJA) - AR - Apprehension of immediate unlawful personal force - The threat of unlawful personal force must be immediate or could be immediate
/
Unlawful Wounding or Inflicting GBH (s20 OAPA) - AR - Conduct - Silence suffices
/
Unlawful Wounding or Inflicting GBH (s20 OAPA) - AR - GBH - Severe Psychiatric illnesses is required
DPP v K
Battery (s39 CJA) - AR - The infliction of unlawful personal force - could be made indirectly
R v Miller
Assault Occasioning ABH (s47 OAPA) - AR -ABH - no need to be serious / Bruise, cut, scratch or swelling
R v Donovan
Assault Occasioning ABH (s47 OAPA) - AR -ABH - need to be more than transient
T v DPP
Assault Occasioning ABH (s47 OAPA) - AR -ABH - Temporary loss of consciousness
R v Chan-Fook
Assault Occasioning ABH (s47 OAPA) - AR -ABH - Psychiatric illnesses suffice if there are recognizable clinical condition
R v Savage; R v Parmenter
Assault Occasioning ABH (s47 OAPA) - MR
/
Unlawful Wounding or Inflicting GBH (s20 OAPA) - MR
Moriarty v Brooks
Unlawful Wounding or Inflicting GBH (s20 OAPA) - AR - Wounding - Requires both layers of the skin to be broken
DPP v Smith
Unlawful Wounding or Inflicting GBH (s20 OAPA) - AR - GBH - ‘Really serious harm’
R v Konzani
Defences - Special defence - Consent - V knows the identity of the D, the nature and quality of the D’s conduct in giving his consent
Attorney-General’s Reference (No 6 of 1980)
Defences - Special defence - Consent - consent would be available to an assault which causes harm unless it falls under the recognized categories / Surgical operation / Dangerous exhibition
R v Brown
Defences - Special defence - Consent - recognized categories - activities must be for ‘public interests’/’good reasons’
/
Other ‘lawful activities’ (e.g. ritual circumcision, tattooing and ear-piercing)
/
but not sadomasochism
R v BM
Defences - Special defence - Consent - recognized categories - but not body modification
R v Barnes
Defences - Special defence - Consent - recognized categories - Sport
Jones
Defences - Special defence - Consent - recognized categories - ‘Horseplay’
R v Dica
Defences - Special defence - Consent - recognized categories - Private sexual activities
R v Emmett
Defences - Special defence - Consent - recognized categories - but not sadomasochism regardless of sexual orientation
s58 Children Act 2004
Reasonable Chastisement
R v Bird
Defences - General defense - Self-defense - the reasonableness of the use of force - factor - Retreat is not required to prove
R v Martin
Defences - General defense - Self-defense - the reasonableness of the use of force - factor - Physical character, but not psychological one
s43(5A) CCA
Defences - General defense - Self-defense - the reasonableness of the use of force - factor - If it is a householder case, the use of force would be unreasonable only if it is grossly….
Palmer v R
Defences - General defense - Self-defense - the reasonableness of the use of force - factor - D may not be unable to response in a too accurate/rational way
R v Williams (Gladstone)
Defences - General defense - Self-defense - according to his honest believe to the circumstance
R v O’Grady
Defences - General defense - Self-defense - according to his honest believe to the circumstance - no mistaken belief based on voluntary intoxication
R v Dadson
Defences - General defense - Self-defense - according to his honest believe to the circumstance - cannot rely on facts of which he was unaware
