NFOATP ACT 1997

Question 1

S.2 Assault

Answer 1

A person shall be guilty of the offence of assault, who without lawful excuse, intentionally or recklessly, directly or indirectly applies force to or causes and impact on the body of another or causes to believe another on reasonable grounds that he or she is likely immediately to be subjected to such force or impact, without the consent of the other.

Question 2

Assault AR: Force

Answer 2

S.2(2): in ss.1(a) force includes:

• an application of heat, light, electric current, noise or any other form of energy
• application of matter in solid liquid or gaseous form.

S.2(1) indirect or direct force applied - DPP v K 1990 - acid poured into hot air dryer

Question 3

DPP v K 1990

Answer 3

Related to indirect force of assault,

Accused poured acid into hot air dryer

Question 4

Assault AR: Action

Answer 4

R v Ireland; R v Burstow 1997
Words can constitute assault.
The behaviour must be such as to put the victim into reasonable fear of subjected impact

Question 5

Assault AR: Immediacy

Answer 5

Tuberville v Savage 1669 - Victim must immediately believe that force is to be subjected

Question 6

Assault AR: Consent

Answer 6

Must be valid, given by a competent individual and not coerced through fraud or force.
Collins v Wilcock 1984 - implied consent to every day life

Question 7

S.3 Assault Causing Harm

Answer 7

A person who assaults another causing him or her harm shall be guilty of an offence.
AR: assault causing harm
MR: within assault - intentional or reckless

Question 8

Minister for Justice v Dolny 2008

Answer 8

Related to assault causing harm.
Peart J stated the differences between s2 and s2 assault. S2 assault requires that the person did not consented, the commisson must be without lawful excuse, intentional or reckless and s3 does not contain these requirements.

Question 9

S.3 Assault Causing Harm

HARM

Answer 9

Defined in s.1 of the act: Harm to body or mind and includes pain and unconsciousness.

Question 10

S.4 Causing Serious Harm

Answer 10

A person creates the offence of causing serious harm who, intentionally or recklessly causing him or her serious harm.

AR: causes serious harm
MR: intentionally or recklessly

LRC in 1994 recommended the creation, NFOATP Act 1997 simply adopts the concept of CSH, assault should not necessarily be amounted

Question 11

Definition of Serious Harm

Answer 11

S.1 Serious harm:
Injury which creates substantial risk of death of serious disfigurement or substantial loss or impairment of the mobility of the body as a whole or of the function of any particular bodily member or organ.

Question 12

DPP v Kirwan 2005

Answer 12

Relates to serious harm, defines the permanence of injury,
Facts were that in a pub fight the def hit V with a glass causing serious harm to his eye.
Def argued that stiches are not part of the harm
Rejected: stitching immediately associated with the injury and necessitated by it.

Question 13

Consent

Answer 13

Can consent to s2 Assault
Not mentioned in s3 and s4.

Consent can be a defence to serious harm in 3 context: sport, general exhibition and sadomasochistic sexual activity

Question 14

R v Brown 1994

Answer 14

Related to consent to assault.
Facts: private sadomasochistic sexual activity.
Stated that consent is only a defence where the conduct is in public interest
HoL rejected 3/2.
Lord Templeman stated that society is bound and entitled to protect itself against cult of violence. Pleasure derived from pain is an evil thing, cruelty is uncivilised. He referred surgeries, boxing, tattoo which is in public interest.
Lord Jauncey: consent is no defence to s.47 of the 1861 Act - implied consent only to conducts in public interest(boxing, surgery, parental chastisement)

Question 15

R v Brown dissents

Answer 15

Lord Slynn: its for legislature to decide if private acts as criminal as public.
Lord Mustill: question of private morality, shouldnt be judged by criminal law.
No theory on consensual violence - questioned boxing.

Question 16

CONSENT

R v Wilson 1997

Answer 16

Relates to consent.
Husband was branding his wife on buttocks with consent. CoA stated wife’s consent as a defence to ACH.
Russell CJ akinned the conduct to tattooing, he deemed it as a conduct with similar dangerousity and pain and also he stated that a consensual activity between husband and wife in a matrimonial home cannot be deemed and a proper matter for criminal prosecution.
Appeal allowed.

Question 17

CONSENT

Laskey and others v UK 1997 ECHR

Answer 17

Relates to Consent to ACH
Homosexual sadomasochistic activity.
Application made against the violation of respect of private life contrary to art 8 of the ECHR. Rejected unanimously, finding that authorities are entitled to consider whether the prosecution and conviction was necessary or not against the appelant in a democratic society for the prottction of health within thr meaning of Article 8(2) of the Convention. Applicant referred to R v Wilson that same conduct in a homosexual context doesnt deserve criminal punishment. Rejected that the conduct was more serious in this case and mentioned that the opinion was based on the nature of the exercise and not on the sexual proclivities of the applicants.

Question 18

Consent to Medical Treatment

Answer 18

Consent by a competent adult will be lawful injury, only if carried out by qualified practitioner for a legitimate therapeutic purpose.
Any patient has a right to refuse - Re a Ward of Court 1996
Surgery carried out without consent is assault.
LRC recommends emergency treatment without consent - rejected.

Question 19

Consent to Sporting Injuries

Answer 19

2 cases:
R v Coney 1882: a blow struck in anger is an assault, but a blow struck in sports which is not intended to cause injury is not. Assault is breach of peace and unlawful, consent of the person struck is immaterial.

R v Barnes 2004: define the criminal threshold level: nature of the act, degree of force, type of sport etc.. and if it has happened in the heat of the moment.

Question 20

R v Coney 1882

Answer 20

Related to consent to sporting injuries.
Determines that a blow struck in anger is an assault, but a blow struck in sports which is not intended to cause injury is not. Assault is breach of peace and unlawful, consent of the person struck is immaterial.

Question 21

R v Barnes 2004

Answer 21

define the criminal threshold level: nature of the act, degree of force, type of sport etc.. and if it has happened in the heat of the moment.

Question 22

S.6 Syringe

Answer 22

(1) A person who (a) injures anotther by piercing the skin of that other with a syringe, or (b) threatens to so injure another with the syringe, with the intention of or where there is a likelihood of causing that other to believe that he or she may become infected with disease as a result of the injury caused or threatened shall be guilty of an offence.
(2) A person who, (a) sprays, pours or puts onto another blood or any fluid or substancr resembling blood, or (b) threatens to spray, pour or put onto another blood or any fluid or substancr resembling blood, with the intention of or where there is a likelihood of causing that other to believe that he or she may become infected with disease as a result of the action caused or threatene shall be guilty of an offence.

The maximum sentence for an offence under Sections 6(1) and 6(2) when tried kn indictment is 10 years imprisonment.

Question 23

S.6(3) Syringe - Transferred Intent

Answer 23

A person who in committing or attemptin to commit an offence under subsection (1) or (2) -
(A) injures a third person with a syringe by piercing his or her skin, or
(B) sprays, pours or puts onto a third person blood or any fluid or substancr resembling blood,
resulting in the third person believing that he or she may become infected with disrase as a result of the injury or action caused shall be guilty of an offence.

Question 24

S.5 Syringe - Actual Attacks

Answer 24

(a) A person who intentionally injures another by piercing the of that ther with a contaminated syringe shall be guilty of an offence.
(b) A person who intentionally sprays, pours or puts onto another contaminated blood shall be guilty of an offence.
(c) A person who in committing or attempting to commit an offencr under paragraph (a) or (b) -
(i) injures a third person with a contaminated syringe by piercing his or her skin, or
(ii) sprays, pours or puts onto a third person contaminated blood, shall be guilty of an offence.

This offence is the most serious offence involving ayringes and a person found guilty of an offence under Section 6(5) is liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for life. It was inserted to deal with the situation where defendant deliberately infects the victim with a disease such as AIDS.

Question 25

S.7 - S.8 Syringe Possession

Answer 25

7. (1) A person who has with him or her in any place -
   (a) a syringe or,
   (b) any blood in a container,
   Intended by him or her unlawfully to cause or threathen to cause injury to or to intimidate another shall be guilty of an offence.
8. (1) Subject to subsection (3), a person who places or abandons a syringe in any place in such a manner that it is likely to injure another and does injure another or is likely to injure, cause a threat to or frighten another shall be guilty of an offence.
   (3) A person who intentionally places a contaminated syringe in any place in such a manner that it injures another shall be guilty of an offence.

Question 26

S.9 Coercion

Answer 26

(1) A person who, with a view to compel another to abstain from doing or to do any act which that other has a lawful right to do or to abstain from doing, wrongfully and without lawful authority- (a) uses violence to or intimidates that other person or a member of the family or the civil partner within the meaning of the Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2010 of the other, or
(b) injures or damages the property of that other, or
(c) persistently follows that other about from place to place, or
(d) watched or besets the premises or other place where that resides, works or carries on business, or happens to be, or the approach to suh premises or place, or
(e) follows that other with one or more other persons in a disorderly manner in or through any public place,
Shall be guilty of an offence.

Wide scope/ covers forms of harassment and intimidation intended to coerce

Question 27

S.10 Harassment

Answer 27

S.10 followed the recommendation of the LRC to make a new offence to cover acts of harassment interfering with a person’s right to a peaceful and private life, even if dont give rise to a fear of violence.

(1) Any person who, without lawful authority or reasonable excuse, by any means including by use of the telephone, harasses another by persistently following, watching, pestering, besetting or communicating with him or her, shall be guilty of an offencr
(2) A person harasses another where
(a) he or she, by his or her acts intentionally or recklessly, seriously interferes with the other’s peace and privary or causes alarm, distress or harm to the other, and
(b) his or her acts are such that a reasonable person would realise that the acts would seriously interfere with the other’s peace and privary or cause alarm, distress or harm to the other.