Written by students who passed Immediately available after payment Read online or as PDF Wrong document? Swap it for free 4.6 TrustPilot
logo-home
Document preview thumbnail
Preview 1 out of 1 pages
Summary

Summary Differences Between Assault and Battery

Document preview thumbnail
Preview 1 out of 1 pages

While often grouped under the single label of "Common Assault," Assault and Battery are distinct legal concepts distinguished by the presence or absence of physical contact. Assault is a non-physical offence where the defendant's actions or words cause the victim to fear the imminent application of unlawful force; the harm is purely psychological, rooted in the victim’s apprehension of an attack. In contrast, Battery is defined by the actual application of unlawful physical force, which can range from a severe blow to the mere touching of a person's clothes (R v Thomas).

Content preview

Assault Battery
Non-fatal offences against the person. Non-fatal offences against the person.
An assault is committed when the defendant Battery is the intention or reckless infliction of
intentionally or recklessly causes another to unlawful physical force upon the victim by the
apprehend immediate and unlawful violence. defendant.
Actus reus – the defendant caused the victim to Actus reus – the application of unlawful force,
apprehend imminent unlawful violence. this can include the slightest touch.
Mens rea – the defendant intended or was Mens rea – the intention or recklessness as to
reckless that the victim would apprehend the application of the force.
imminent unlawful force.
Cases – R v Constanza (1997) – court of appeal Cases – Collins v Wilcock (1984) – two police
held that letters could be an assault. officers saw a woman n the streets for the
R v Ireland – It was held that even silent purposes of prostitution. She refused to talk to
telephone calls can be an assault. It depends on the police and walked away. One of the officers
the facts of the case. grabbed her arm to prevent her from leaving.
R v Lamb – pointing an unloaded gun at She became abusive and scratched his arm.
someone who knows that it is unloaded cannot
be an assault. Wood (Fraser) v DPP (2008) –

R v Thomas – the defendant touched and
rubbed the victim’s skirt. The judges decided
that there should be no dispute, that when you
touch someone’s clothes, you are touching
them.
Indirect Act – R v Martin – the defendant placed
an iron bar across a theatre door, he then
switched off the lights. In the panic, many
people were injured as they tried to escape the
theatre. Despite the defendant not actually
touching the victims, he committed battery.

Document information

Study Level
Subject
Uploaded on
April 15, 2026
Number of pages
1
Written in
2024/2025
Type
Summary
£6.28

Wrong document? Swap it for free Within 14 days of purchase and before downloading, you can choose a different document. You can simply spend the amount again.
Written by students who passed
Immediately available after payment
Read online or as PDF

Sold
0
Followers
0
Items
35
Last sold
-


Why students choose Stuvia

Created by fellow students, verified by reviews

Quality you can trust: written by students who passed their exams and reviewed by others who've used these revision notes.

Didn't get what you expected? Choose another document

No problem! You can straightaway pick a different document that better suits what you're after.

Pay as you like, start learning straight away

No subscription, no commitments. Pay the way you're used to via credit card and download your PDF document instantly.

Student with book image

“Bought, downloaded, and smashed it. It really can be that simple.”

Alisha Student

Working on your references?

Create accurate citations in APA, MLA and Harvard with our free citation generator.

Working on your references?

Frequently asked questions