Common Assault- Battery
-Stage beyond assault when the D: ‘Intentionally or subjective recklessly applies unlawful force to another.’
Battery Offences include: (should look a seriousness of injury) – Evidently someone has touched someone
-No injury at all
-Swellings
-Scratches
-Minor bruising
-Superficial cuts (very minor cuts)
-Grazes
-Minor black eye
-Reddening of the skin
-Wet skin
(CPS Charging standard ^^^^^^)
ACTUS REUS of common assault battery:
1. Force
2. Act/Omission
3. Unlawful
1. Force 2. Act/Omission 3. Unlawful
-Must be an ‘application of unlawful force to -Applied four ways: Direct/Indirect Act, -Lawful: By police (lawful arrest)
another person’ (Slightest touch) Continuing act or omission - Self-defence or prevention of crime
^Must state how force was applied. Direct Act: -Genuine consent
Collins v Wilcock (1984): Force can include even -Hill v Baxter (Voluntary Act)
the slightest touch Indirect Act:
A v UK (1998): correction of a child by
Wood (Fraser) v DPP (2008): (A*) Same principle -Apply force to someone but don’t directly touch
parent
as in Collins, need for confirmation. them, may not even be present at the time.
R v Thomas (1985): Touching someone’s clothes -DPP v K (1990): Acid in Hand dryer situation
can be a battery offence Continuing Act:
-AR-> MR
-Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commander
-Omission
-Judge Stephen J: “A sees B drowning and can
save him by holding out his hand. A abstains
from doing so in order that B drowns. A has
committed no offence”
Contractual R v Pittwood
Chain of events R v Miller
Voluntary R v Evans
Duty cause of R v Gibbons and
relationship Proctor
Official Position R v Dytham
Statute Law RTA 1988
Doctor NHS NHS v Bland
Only case examples where omission is available
is DPP v Santa-Bermudez + Miller
- Causation: Factual and Legal (AR SATISFIED)
MENS REA of common assault battery:
Offence of BASIC INTENT, so options are:
1. Direct intention
2. Recklessness
Direct Intention: Recklessness:
‘An intention to apply unlawful force to another’ ‘Recklessness as to whether unlawful force is applied’
-Mohan -Cunningham
-Aim has been achieved -Savage= ‘maliciously’
-Most serious level of intention -Aware of the risk and did he take it anyway?
Transferred Malice: Continuing Act: Fagan
-Get wrong V
-R v Pembilton (wasn’t TM) Coincidence: Church or Thabo Meli
-R v Latimer/Mitchell (was TM)
-Stage beyond assault when the D: ‘Intentionally or subjective recklessly applies unlawful force to another.’
Battery Offences include: (should look a seriousness of injury) – Evidently someone has touched someone
-No injury at all
-Swellings
-Scratches
-Minor bruising
-Superficial cuts (very minor cuts)
-Grazes
-Minor black eye
-Reddening of the skin
-Wet skin
(CPS Charging standard ^^^^^^)
ACTUS REUS of common assault battery:
1. Force
2. Act/Omission
3. Unlawful
1. Force 2. Act/Omission 3. Unlawful
-Must be an ‘application of unlawful force to -Applied four ways: Direct/Indirect Act, -Lawful: By police (lawful arrest)
another person’ (Slightest touch) Continuing act or omission - Self-defence or prevention of crime
^Must state how force was applied. Direct Act: -Genuine consent
Collins v Wilcock (1984): Force can include even -Hill v Baxter (Voluntary Act)
the slightest touch Indirect Act:
A v UK (1998): correction of a child by
Wood (Fraser) v DPP (2008): (A*) Same principle -Apply force to someone but don’t directly touch
parent
as in Collins, need for confirmation. them, may not even be present at the time.
R v Thomas (1985): Touching someone’s clothes -DPP v K (1990): Acid in Hand dryer situation
can be a battery offence Continuing Act:
-AR-> MR
-Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commander
-Omission
-Judge Stephen J: “A sees B drowning and can
save him by holding out his hand. A abstains
from doing so in order that B drowns. A has
committed no offence”
Contractual R v Pittwood
Chain of events R v Miller
Voluntary R v Evans
Duty cause of R v Gibbons and
relationship Proctor
Official Position R v Dytham
Statute Law RTA 1988
Doctor NHS NHS v Bland
Only case examples where omission is available
is DPP v Santa-Bermudez + Miller
- Causation: Factual and Legal (AR SATISFIED)
MENS REA of common assault battery:
Offence of BASIC INTENT, so options are:
1. Direct intention
2. Recklessness
Direct Intention: Recklessness:
‘An intention to apply unlawful force to another’ ‘Recklessness as to whether unlawful force is applied’
-Mohan -Cunningham
-Aim has been achieved -Savage= ‘maliciously’
-Most serious level of intention -Aware of the risk and did he take it anyway?
Transferred Malice: Continuing Act: Fagan
-Get wrong V
-R v Pembilton (wasn’t TM) Coincidence: Church or Thabo Meli
-R v Latimer/Mitchell (was TM)
