Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person
Common Assault
assault or battery.
charged under Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.
Commo
Non-Fatal n Law / Sentence Actus Reus Mens Rea
Offence Statutor
y Law
maximum
of 6 to cause basic intent
common months apprehension offence:
Assault law imprisonm for the infliction intention to cause
ent of immediate another to apprehend
summary unlawful force immediate unlawful
offence AND/OR to the victim force or recklessness
as to whether
maximum apprehension is
of £5000 caused.
fine
maximum
of 6
common months basic intent
Battery law imprisonm to inflict offence:
ent unlawful force intention to inflict
summary unlawful force or
offence AND/OR recklessness as to
whether unlawful
maximum force is inflicted.
of £5000
fine
statutory
Assault law
Occasioni (Section maximum an assault or basic intent
ng Actual 47) of 5 years battery which offence:
Bodily imprisonm causes actual mens rea of assault or
Harm triable ent bodily harm to battery.
either the victim (half mens rea)
way
offence
statutory
Malicious law basic intent
Wounding (Section maximum to wound or offence:
or 20) of 5 years inflict grievous intention to wound or
Inflicting imprisonm bodily harm inflict grievous bodily
Grievous triable ent harm or recklessness
Bodily either as to whether a
Harm way wound or grievous
, offence bodily harm is
inflicted.
Malicious statutory
Wounding law specific intent
or (Section maximum to wound or offence:
Inflicting 18) of life cause grievous intention to inflict
Grievous imprisonm bodily harm grievous bodily harm
Bodily indictabl ent or intention to
Harm with e offence prevent or resist the
Intent lawful apprehension
of any person.
Case Studies
assault (actus reus)
an omission is not sufficient for the actus reus of assault.
Case Facts Law
Rv D wrote 800 letters and made written words can be
Constanze several calls to V. sufficient for the actus
reus of assault.
battery (actus reus)
Case Law
Collins v any touching can be sufficient for the actus reus of battery.
Wilcock
Fagen v
Metropolitan a continuing act can be sufficient for the actus reus of
Police battery.
DPP v K an indirect act can be sufficient for the actus reus of battery.
DPP v Santa-
Bermudez an omission is sufficient for the actus reus of battery.
battery (mens rea)
Case Law
DPP v becoming intoxicated by drink and drugs can be sufficient
Magewski recklessness for the mens rea of battery.
, assault occasioning actual bodily harm (actus reus)
Case Law
‘actual’ = not so trivial as to be insignificant.
‘bodily’
R v Chan - not limited to skin, flesh, and bones.
Fook - includes the brain and nervous system (e.g. psychiatric
harm).
‘harm’ = any hurt or injury beyond the interference with the
health and comfort of the victim.
malicious wounding or inflicting grievous bodily harm (actus reus)
‘wound’
= a cut or a break in the continuity of the whole skin.
a cut or a break in the continuity of the internal skin is sufficient for the
actus reus of malicious wounding or inflicting grievous bodily harm (e.g.
in the cheek).
Case Law
JCC v internal bleeding without a cut or a break in the continuity of
Eisenhower the whole skin of the skin is not sufficient for the actus reus
of malicious wounding or inflicting grievous bodily harm.
‘grievous bodily harm’
= really serious harm.
physical or psychiatric harm and serious infection are sufficient for the
actus reus of malicious wounding or inflicting grievous bodily harm.
Case Law
R v Bollom the severity of the harm should be assessed according to the
age and health of the victim.
Common Assault
assault or battery.
charged under Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.
Commo
Non-Fatal n Law / Sentence Actus Reus Mens Rea
Offence Statutor
y Law
maximum
of 6 to cause basic intent
common months apprehension offence:
Assault law imprisonm for the infliction intention to cause
ent of immediate another to apprehend
summary unlawful force immediate unlawful
offence AND/OR to the victim force or recklessness
as to whether
maximum apprehension is
of £5000 caused.
fine
maximum
of 6
common months basic intent
Battery law imprisonm to inflict offence:
ent unlawful force intention to inflict
summary unlawful force or
offence AND/OR recklessness as to
whether unlawful
maximum force is inflicted.
of £5000
fine
statutory
Assault law
Occasioni (Section maximum an assault or basic intent
ng Actual 47) of 5 years battery which offence:
Bodily imprisonm causes actual mens rea of assault or
Harm triable ent bodily harm to battery.
either the victim (half mens rea)
way
offence
statutory
Malicious law basic intent
Wounding (Section maximum to wound or offence:
or 20) of 5 years inflict grievous intention to wound or
Inflicting imprisonm bodily harm inflict grievous bodily
Grievous triable ent harm or recklessness
Bodily either as to whether a
Harm way wound or grievous
, offence bodily harm is
inflicted.
Malicious statutory
Wounding law specific intent
or (Section maximum to wound or offence:
Inflicting 18) of life cause grievous intention to inflict
Grievous imprisonm bodily harm grievous bodily harm
Bodily indictabl ent or intention to
Harm with e offence prevent or resist the
Intent lawful apprehension
of any person.
Case Studies
assault (actus reus)
an omission is not sufficient for the actus reus of assault.
Case Facts Law
Rv D wrote 800 letters and made written words can be
Constanze several calls to V. sufficient for the actus
reus of assault.
battery (actus reus)
Case Law
Collins v any touching can be sufficient for the actus reus of battery.
Wilcock
Fagen v
Metropolitan a continuing act can be sufficient for the actus reus of
Police battery.
DPP v K an indirect act can be sufficient for the actus reus of battery.
DPP v Santa-
Bermudez an omission is sufficient for the actus reus of battery.
battery (mens rea)
Case Law
DPP v becoming intoxicated by drink and drugs can be sufficient
Magewski recklessness for the mens rea of battery.
, assault occasioning actual bodily harm (actus reus)
Case Law
‘actual’ = not so trivial as to be insignificant.
‘bodily’
R v Chan - not limited to skin, flesh, and bones.
Fook - includes the brain and nervous system (e.g. psychiatric
harm).
‘harm’ = any hurt or injury beyond the interference with the
health and comfort of the victim.
malicious wounding or inflicting grievous bodily harm (actus reus)
‘wound’
= a cut or a break in the continuity of the whole skin.
a cut or a break in the continuity of the internal skin is sufficient for the
actus reus of malicious wounding or inflicting grievous bodily harm (e.g.
in the cheek).
Case Law
JCC v internal bleeding without a cut or a break in the continuity of
Eisenhower the whole skin of the skin is not sufficient for the actus reus
of malicious wounding or inflicting grievous bodily harm.
‘grievous bodily harm’
= really serious harm.
physical or psychiatric harm and serious infection are sufficient for the
actus reus of malicious wounding or inflicting grievous bodily harm.
Case Law
R v Bollom the severity of the harm should be assessed according to the
age and health of the victim.
