OAPA

Question 1

Common assault, definition:

Answer 1

Collins v Wilcock: “an assault is an act which causes another person to apprehend the infliction of immediate unlawful force upon his person.”

Question 2

Common assault, actus reus:

Answer 2

Act:
Positive act. Includes words.
R v Ireland - ‘a thing said is a thing done’. Silent calls a form of positive communication.

Apprehension:
Act must cause apprehension of violence.

Immediate violence:
R v Ireland - only the apprehension of immediate violence would suffice for assault.
R v Constanza - caused an apprehension of violence at some time not excluding the immediate future.

Question 3

Common assault, mens rea:

Answer 3

Either:

• intention to cause apprehension of unlawful violence;
• subjective recklessness.

Question 4

Battery, definition:

Answer 4

Collins v Wilcock: “a battery is the actual infliction of unlawful force on another person.”

Question 5

Battery, actus reus:

Answer 5

1. Direct or indirect (Haystead - made lady drop baby, convicted of battery on the baby;
2. Non-consensual;
3. Physical contact (Thomas).

Question 6

Assault occasioning actual bodily harm, s. 47, definition:

Answer 6

Actual bodily harm, Donovan: “more than merely trifling or transient.”

Question 7

S. 47, actus reus:

Answer 7

1. Assault resulting in ABH;
2. Battery resulting in ABH.
   Only difference between s. 47 and assault/battery is the level of harm.

Question 8

S. 47, escape cases:

Answer 8

The courts have held that the defendant retains responsibility for injuries sustained whilst escape from assault/violence.

R v Lewis: locked in bathroom, door being kicked down, jumped out window.

R v Roberts: jumped out of car.

Question 9

S. 47, psychiatric injuries:

Answer 9

R v Chan Fook: fear, distress and panic are excluded.
R v Burstow: the statute was of the ‘always speaking’ kind that expanded to accommodate new developments such as greater understanding of the link between mind and body.

Question 10

S. 47, mens rea:

Answer 10

1. Assault or battery;
2. ABH.
   An offence of half mens rea.
   R v Savage: can establish mens rea for battery, and liable under s. 47.

Question 11

S. 20, options:

Answer 11

1. Intentional wounding;
2. Intentional infliction of GBH;
3. Reckless wounding;
4. Reckless infliction of GBH.

Question 12

S. 20, actus reus:

Answer 12

DPP v Smith - “GBH = really serious harm.”
C v Eisenhower: “a wound is a break in the continuity of both layers of the skin.”

Infliction: R v Burstow, no distinction between ‘cause’ and ‘inflict’.

Question 13

S. 20, mens rea:

Answer 13

S. 20 refers to malicious wounding or infliction of GBH.
Malicious refers to intention of subjective recklessness. The test of recklessness is a modified form of Cunningham, set out by HoL in DPP v Parmenter.
Principle: based upon what the defendant actually foresaw, not what he ought to have. Foresight of the consequences required but not foresight of magnitude.

Question 14

S. 18, actus reus:

Answer 14

Two ways in which s. 18 can be satisfied:

1. Unlawful wounding;
2. Causing GBH.

Question 15

S. 18, mens rea:

Answer 15

1. Malice - recklessness, as in s. 20;
2. Ulterior intent - must intend to cause GBH, an intention to wound will not suffice. Intention to resist/prevent arrest covers the arrest of the defendant or a third party.

Question 16

DPP v Smith

Answer 16

Hair