defences to trespass 3 Flashcards

1
Q

self-defence facts (2)

A
  • Action must be proportionate to the threat

- Action must be necessary OR D must reasonably believe the actions are necessary

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

case for self-defence

A

Ashley v Chief Constable of Sussex Police

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

outcome in Ashley v Chief Constable of Sussex Police

A
  • it was decided that belief in need for self-defence needs to be reasonable, an honest belief is not enough
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

what is necessity

A

can only be used if there is fear of immediate threat (Austin)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

2 cases for necessity

A
  • Austin and Saxby v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
  • Re A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Austin and Saxby v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis

outcome

A

necessity was a defence for the police officer’s actions because they thought it was necessary to do this because there was a threat to public

-can only be used if there is a fear of an immediate threat

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Re A outcome

A

They used necessity as a defence for the good quality of life for one of the twins.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

consent

3 case

A
  • Herd v Weardale Steel, Coke and Coal Co Ltd
  • Chatterton v Gerson
  • Re T
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Herd v Weardale Steel, Coke and Coal Co Ltd

outcome

A

court said there was no FI- he was under a contract, and he consented to stay in the pit. instead court said employer could sue for a breach of contract (power imbalance)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

what does Giliker and Beckwith say about Herd

A

Harsh ruling in favour of employers right over employees. A power imbalance here.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Consent in the medical context

2 cases

A
  • Chatterton v Gerson

- Re T

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Chatterton v Gerson outcome

A

there was no claim in battery, because patient had given consent and understood the broad nature of the surgery- there may be a negligence claim instead

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Re T outcome

A

she was influenced because of her mother, court held her refusal was not free, so not valid

-no battery, it was in her best interest to have the treatment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

what is highlighted from the case of Re T

A

Treatment after competent patient refuses treatment would amount to battery

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

when does battery take place in a medical context

A

if the patient doesn’t agree and doctor does surgery

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

but when may it not constitute to a battery if a doctor performs without consent?

A

if the patient has the incapacity to consent and the surgery is needed for their best interests- they may not be liable in battery but a claim in negligence may arise

17
Q

H v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis outcome

A

Their action was seen as unreasonable, and damages were awarded. They would have had a defence if they believed they had the patient’s best interests at heart.

18
Q

when can you bring a negligence claim and not a battery claim

A

can bring a negligence claim but not a battery claim if there is a mistake of consent.

19
Q

who said reasonable mistake should be a defence to all trespass to the person torts

A

Lunney and Oliphant

20
Q

what did Lunney and Oliphant say about reasonable mistake in consent

A

they say that reasonable mistake should be a defence to all trespass to the person torts

21
Q

what do Murphy and Fleming say about reasonable/ honest mistakes

A

Reasonable/honest mistakes, such as reasonable belief in consent, do not provide
a defence, only the C’s actual consent will be enough

22
Q

what does Ashley v Chief Constable of Sussex Police say about self-defence and consent

A

a person acts quickly to an immediate threat, with consent- the person isn’t acting to protect any rights- only the C’s actual defence should provide a defence

23
Q

state 2 things we learn from Ashley

A
  • the difference between self-defence and consent
  • a reasonable belief in thinned for self-defence should provide a defence, but only the C’s actual consent should provide a defence, not a reasonable but mistaken belief in consent
24
Q

what tort can link rape to

A

battery

25
Q

what is unclear about the rape law

A

whether a reasonable belief in that consent, whether that would that negate a civil liability or not? Or whether the C’s actual consent is enough

26
Q

what can easily contribute to the tort of batter

A

Assault by penetration and sexual assault could easily constitute the tort of battery, which encompasses all sorts of unlawful contact, done without consent.

27
Q

rape is a what harm

A

gendered harm (usually)

28
Q

how is there a justice gap

A
  • there is a high attrition rate

- but low conviction rate

29
Q

Lawson v Glaves-Smith, Executor for the Estate of Dawes outcome

A

she was able to prove on the balance of probabilities that he sexually assaulted and falsly imprisoned her, she awarded a huge sum for the trauma and loss of her business

30
Q

Parrington v Marriott (1999) Unreported outcome

A

not successful in criminal court, but claim successful in tort claim, in a civil court on the balance of probabilities.

31
Q

W v Meah; D v Meah outcome

A

there has been a successful criminal conviction but he got lots of money in a separate civil case so C’s asked where their money is so sued in a civil court, and were successful.

32
Q

consent

general principle from Chatterton v Gerson

A

A surgeon does not commit battery if performing a surgery and the patient has consented

-principle of autonomy: freedom and capacity to consent

33
Q

what case is the best interests test seen in

A

Re F (Mental Capacity Act 2005, s4)

34
Q

Does an honest or reasonable, but mistaken belief in consent provide a defence to trespass to the person?

A

does not provide a defence

35
Q

what do Lunney and Oliphant say about reasonable mistake in consent

A

that reasonable mistake in consent should be a defence to all trespass to the person torts

36
Q

case for whether self-defence and consent are different, whether they justify different rules

A

R v Governor of Brockhill Prison, ex p Evans