Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM


Top Flashcards (Certified)
All Flashcards

Law > Non Fatal Offences > Flashcards

Non Fatal Offences Flashcards

Assault, Battery, ABH, Wounding, GBh

1
Q

What is the definition of assault in common law?

A

Intentionally or recklessly causing the victim to apprehend immediate violence.

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

What is the actus reus of assault

A

actions or words that cause the victim to apprehend immediate violence

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

What physical reactions can indicate assault?

A

Shaking, crying, running away, etc.

These reactions show the victim’s apprehension of violence.

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

Read v Coker (1853)

A

Established that apprehension of immediate and unlawful violence constitutes assault.

The case illustrates how gestures can lead to an assault charge.

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

R v Ireland (1977)

A

-D. breathed silently down the phone
## Footnote

Silence can amount to assault.

This case expanded the definition of assault to include non-verbal threats.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

R v Constanza (1997)

A

-D. graffitied a threat
## Footnote

Writing can be considered assault.

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

Tuberville v Savage (1669)

A

-“if… i would”
## Footnote

Words can negate an assault.
If = NO assault

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

Smith v C.C. of Woking (1983)

A

-D. stared into ground floor house
## Footnote

The threat must be in the near future to constitute assault.

The case emphasized that the victim’s apprehension of violence is crucial.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Logdon v DPP (1976)

A

-V. has fake gun pulled

Apprehension of a threat matters more than whether the threat can actually happen.

The victim’s perception of danger is key.

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

What is the Actus Reus (AR) for battery?

A

Applying unlawful force

Battery involves the application of this unlawful force to another person.

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

Define battery in legal terms.

A

Intentionally or recklessly applying unlawful force

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

What case established that touching clothes can constitute battery?

A

R v Thomas (1985)

In this case, touching a girl’s skirt was deemed sufficient for battery.

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

How can battery be applied

A

Direct and indirect, recklessness

Pagett, Woollin, Cunningham

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

When is force lawful?

A

Through implied consent eg sports or ordinary jostling eg messing around

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

In which case was there ordinary jostling?

A

Wilson v Pringle (1986)

The court found that the actions were not malicious and lacked mens rea.

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

True or False: Battery requires physical injury to the victim.

A

False

Battery does not require injury; it is about the application of force.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Fill in the blank: Battery is defined as the application of _______.

A

unlawful force

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What are examples of activities that may involve battery?

A
  • Rugby
  • Boxing
  • Martial arts

These activities may involve the application of force that can be considered battery under certain circumstances.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What is the significance of ‘ordinary jostlings’ in relation to battery?

A

They may not constitute battery

Ordinary jostlings typically do not meet the threshold for unlawful force.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What is ‘ordinary jostling’?

A

Inevitable contact in crowded places like supermarkets or busy streets

Referenced in Collins v Wilcock (1984), where a woman could not complain about incidental contact.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What was the main issue in Collins v Wilcock (1984)?

A

A woman walking away from an officer was grabbed, leading to a struggle and a scratch on the officer

The case illustrates the limits of permissible contact in public spaces.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

In the context of battery, what constitutes ‘ordinary jostling’?

A

Shaking hands, a slap on the back, or brushing shoulders etc.

Exceeding this ordinary jostling can lead to a battery claim.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

What was the ruling in Fagan v MPC?

A

Force can be applied through a continuing act, such as driving over a foot and staying on it

This case emphasizes the application of force in a continuous manner.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What incident was involved in the case of Santana Bermudez (2003)?

A

An officer was injured when D. failed to inform officer about a sharp object in pockets

This case highlights force can be through omission due to the duty to inform about potential dangers.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
True or False: An omission can lead to liability if the defendant has a duty to act.
True ## Footnote Liability may arise when a person's failure to act causes harm.
26
Fill in the blank: A defendant can be liable for an injury caused by a _______ if they neglect their duty.
[sharp object] ## Footnote Example from Santana Bermudez (2003) where failure to disclose a sharp object led to injury.
27
What did DPP v K conclude?
Force can be applied **indirectly** through objects. ## Footnote D. placed acid from chem lab in hand dryer as a prank injuring other student
28
What is the mens rea of battery?
**Intentionally or recklessly** applying unlawful force ## Footnote Mohan, Cunningham Only direct/reckless
29
Battery actus reus explain exam paragraph
For the actus reus, D apply unlawful force to V. **Wilson v Pringle** shows this force must be hostile and go beyond the ordinary jostlings of everyday life.
30
Battery mens rea explain exam paragraph
The mens rea of battery is applying unlawful force intentionally or recklessly. Intention refers to direct intent, where D. aims to bring about the consequence (R v Mohan). Recklessness refers to D. recognising a risk but carrying on regardless (R v Cunningham) Therefore to have the mesn rea for battery D. must either aim to cause the consequence or see a risk but carry on regardless, applying unlawful force.
31
What does ABH stand for?
Actual Bodily Harm ## Footnote Defined in S47 of Offences Against the Person Act 1861.
32
What is defined as bodily harm in the context of ABH?
Defined in Section 47 of OAPA 1861 as assault occasioning actual bodily harm ## Footnote Includes both physical injuries and psychological harm.
33
What are the three requirements to prove ABH?
* Not insignificant harm (also not serious) * Assault or battery must occur * Victim suffers an ABH-level injury
34
What is the actus reus (AR) of assault in ABH cases?
Causing the victim to apprehend immediate violence ## Footnote Assault must create a fear of immediate harm.
35
What constitutes battery in the context of ABH?
Applying unlawful force ## Footnote Battery involves physical contact that is unlawful.
36
What is an example of an ABH injury?
**R v Miller** Any injury calculated to interfere with health or comfort ## Footnote Examples include bruises, cuts, or psychological harm.
37
True or False: Psychological harm can be considered ABH.
True ## Footnote Psychological harm can include conditions like PTSD or anxiety disorders.
38
What case involved psychological harm leading to a conviction for ABH?
R v Chan-Fook (1944) ## Footnote The accused was convicted for causing psychological harm by locking the victim in a room.
39
Fill in the blank: Any injury that is not _______ can be considered for ABH.
insignificant
40
What type of emotional states are excluded from being classified as psychological harm in ABH cases?
Mere emotions like fear, anxiety, distress, or panic ## Footnote Actual psychological injuries must be more severe.
41
What is a potential psychological injury that may qualify under ABH?
Depression or panic attacks ## Footnote Serious psychological conditions may be considered for ABH.
42
In the case of DPP v Smith, what was the significant action taken by the defendant?
Cutting the victim's ponytail ## Footnote This action was deemed sufficient to constitute ABH despite the absence of physical injuries.
43
What was the outcome of the appeal in DPP v Smith regarding the cutting of hair?
Cutting hair was considered ABH ## Footnote The appeal confirmed that the act of cutting hair constituted Actual Bodily Harm.
44
In T v DPP (2003), what condition did the victim experience?
Loss of consciousness ## Footnote This was determined to be sufficient for a finding of Actual Bodily Harm.
45
What must be established to determine if there is ABH according to the Chan case?
injury should not be so trivial as to be wholly insignificant ## Footnote The Chan case establishes a standard for assessing the severity of injury in ABH cases.
46
What is the significance of the case R v Savage (1990) in relation to ABH?
No mens rea required to cause injury ## Footnote The case established that a defendant does not need to intend to cause injury for ABH to be applicable, MR for battery was enough
47
True or False: Emotional distress alone is sufficient to claim ABH.
False ## Footnote ABH requires a physical injury rather than mere emotional upset.
48
What was the defendant's action in the R v Savage case that caused ABH?
Threw a glass at the victim ## Footnote The action of throwing glass was considered reckless and led to a finding of ABH.
49
What is the mens rea of ABH?
MR of the assault/battery is enough. Assault - DI/RECK causing V. to apprehend immediate violence Battery - DI/RECK applying unlawful force
50
ABH MR **case**
**R v Savage** -D. threw beer glass at husbands new GF -glass slipped, V. hit ## Footnote MR of battery was enough for ABH
51
ABH Exam skills
**Identify** offence **Define** offence **Explain** AR of offence eg. assault **Apply** AR of offence **Explain** AR of ABH **Apply** AR of ABH **Explain** Causation; factual, legal, *intervening acts, TSR* **Apply** Causation; factual, legal, *intervening acts, TSR* **Explain** MR of offence eg assault **+** cases **Apply** MR of offence **Conclude** liability
52
ABH Paragraph
**I** -D. has committed an ABH against V. **D** -ABH is defined in s47 of the OAPA 1861 as assault occasioning actual bodily harm. **E** -In order for the D to have committed the actus reus, there must be a common assault that causes some injury. -Firstly there must be a common assault. This is either an assault or battery. In this case there is a (*battery. Battery is the application of unlawful force. / assault. Assault is causing the victim to apprehend immediate personal violence).* -*D. must apply force
53
What is the definition of wounding according to Section 20 of OAPA 1861?
Wounding is defined as unlawfully wounding a person ## Footnote Section 20 pertains to less serious offenses.
54
What distinguishes Section 18 from Section 20 in the context of wounding?
Section 18 involves more serious offenses and requires direct or oblique intent ## Footnote Section 18 is considered more serious than Section 20.
55
What are the two key elements required to prove wounding?
1. Injury classified as a wound 2. Act has caused the wound
56
What case established the definition of a wound as a break in continuity of skin?
JCC v Eisenhower ## Footnote This case clarified that a wound requires a break in the skin, not just internal bleeding.
57
In the case of JCC v Eisenhower, what was the incident that led to the ruling?
An airgun was fired, causing a bloodshot eye without a skin cut.
58
According to legal definitions, what constitutes a wound?
A break in continuity of skin involving two layers ## Footnote Internal bleeding alone does not qualify as a wound.
59
Which MR case is associated with Section 20 of OAPA 1861? ## Footnote wounding **AND** GBH
R v Mowatt ## Footnote -D. punched V. over £5 repeatedly **S.20 = direct intent or recklessness to cause some harm**
60
Which MR case is associated with Section 18 of OAPA 1861? ## Footnote wounding **AND** GBH
R v Belfon ## Footnote -D. slashed V. in the face with a razor **S.18 = direct or oblique intent to cause serious harm**
61
Wounding Flowchart
62
Wounding Exam Paragraph Structure
**IDEACEA** **I** dentity offence **D** efine offence **E** xplain AR **A** pply AR **C** ausation - fac/leg **E** xplain MR **A** pply MR
63
What is GBH defined as in S.20/S.18 OAPA 1861?
Unlawful wounding or inflicting GBH (with intent) ## Footnote GBH stands for Grievous Bodily Harm.
64
What is the actus reus (AR) for proving GBH?
Inflicting GBH
65
In the case of DPP v. Smith, what were the outcomes related to GBH?
Ordered to stop car, jumped in front and died **GBH = serious, not permenant**
66
What is the significance of the case of R v. Brown & Stratton?
**Accumulation of minor injuries leading to serious harm** ## Footnote -beat up trans, broke teeth and bruised
67
What was the outcome of R v. Martin (1881)?
Serious psychological harm from placing a bar on an exit **GBH can be indirect**
68
In R v. Dica, what was concurred?
Had STD, knew, had sex **GBH can be biological harm**
69
What type of harm is established in R v. Burstow?
**Psychological harm** ## Footnote -distributed hate mail to ex's neighbours
70
What injuries were noted in R v. Bollom?
Bruised 17-month-old **age and health considered for GBH**
71
Fill in the blank: GBH is defined as _______.
Grievous Bodily Harm
72
True or False: GBH must result in permanent injury.
False
73
What does the case of R v Martin (1881) illustrate about indirect harm?
Injuries caused by panic in a public setting
74
Name a case that involved the accumulation of minor injuries leading to serious harm.
R v. Brown & Stratton
75
Examples of GBH level injuries
brain damage, broken limbs, paralysis, coma, internal bleeding
76
Alternative MR for both wounding **AND** GBH
**S.18** - serious harm *Either*: 1. DI/OI **(R v Belfon)** 2. intention to resist, DI/recklessness to cause harm **(R v Morrison)**
77
What are the requirements for the alternative MR?
* V must be police officer# * D. intends to resist arrest * Therefore, dir/reck to cause harm "because its police = more culpable"
78
**Case** for alternative MR
**R v Morrison** **D. resisted and saw some harm** ## Footnote -D. held by police, ran through glass -V. cut and bruised

Law (23 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions