Other slides in this set

Slide 2

Preview of page 2

Here's a taster:

Tips for these types of questions
1. Relate back to scenario.
2. Use `stairway to heaven'.
3. E.g did the defendant push the victim over?
Was it a direct battery?
4. Use names of individuals in answers and
what was their injury?
5. The first few questions on exam paper will be
definition questions and the last ones
including sentencing will involve application
of answers to the story.…read more

Slide 3

Preview of page 3

Here's a taster:

10 Things Assault
1. Crime of Common law to intentionally or recklessly cause V to fear
immediate unlawful personal violence.
2. AR- to cause V to fear immediate unlawful personal violence. Case
of Smith (D looking through window)
3. Must be voluntary unlawful act causing V fear of violence.
4. Fear of violence must be immediate, tomorrow isn't immediate.
(Case of Tuberville)
5. Words or silence on phone can be immediate fear of violence. Case
of Ireland ­ silent phone calls led to fear of what D might do next.
In Smith D looking through V's window was enough for V to fear
what he might do next.
6. Fear of violence, V doesn't need to be frightened, can have
expectation of being hit.
7. MR ­ Direct Intent, where D makes decision to bring about fear of
unlawful force.
8. MR ­ Recklessness, where D knew of risk that V would be in fear of
unlawful force, but went ahead with act anyway.
9. Tried in Magistrates Court ­ summary crime.
10. 6 months maximum sentence in prison or fine of £5000.…read more

Slide 4

Preview of page 4

Here's a taster:

10 Things Battery
1. Crime of Common law to intentionally or recklessly
apply/inflict unlawful personal force on V.
2. AR ­ voluntarily apply/inflict unlawful personal force. Mere
touching is battery. Case of Thomas ­ touched skirt (battery.)
3. Kiss is battery if done without lawful consent.
4. Can be guilty of Indirect Battery, using object + not applying
force yourself. Fagan + car, in DPP v K, acid in hot air dryer in
school, also; Thomas + skirt.
5. Case of Haystead indirect battery on baby when D punched
mother holding baby's hand.
6. MR ­ Direct Intent, D wants to bring about unlawful force.
7. MR ­ Subjective Recklessness, D aware of risk of applying
unlawful + carries on to take the risk.
8. Social Interaction on a tube where touching other people is
common + accepted, no battery.
9. Tried in Magistrates Court ­ summary crime.
10. 6 months maximum sentence in prison or fine of £5000.…read more

Slide 5

Preview of page 5

Here's a taster:

10 Things for s47 ABH
1. Crime under s47 of Offences Against the Person Act 1861.
2. Must be Actual bodily harm, physical/psychiatric caused by Assault/Battery.
3. AR ­ actual bodily harm affecting health or welfare of V. Injuries from actual bodily
harm; bruising, cuts and broken fingers.
4. Psychiatric harm in Chan-Fook case, V suffered psychiatric harm after locked in
room.
5. AR ­ Actual bodily harm must be caused by AR of Assault (voluntary unlawful act
causing V fear of being harmed) or Battery (Voluntary act of applying/inflicting
unlawful personal force)
6. MR ­ Direct Intent, D wants to cause V some unlawful force (battery) or to fear
unlawful force. (assault) Recklessness, D knows of risk + that it could cause SOME
unlawful force (battery) or fear unlawful force, (assault) yet takes risk anyway.
7. MR of assault or battery, no MR needed for intending to cause actual injury to V. (R
v Roberts, girl suffers head injuries, D didn't intend result.)
8. R v Savage, D threw pint over V, glass then slipped out of hand and caused more
serious injury. Didn't intend result or see risk of act. Therefore indirect battery
(beer and unlawful force/touching) as actual injury was enough for AR + MR of ABH.
9. Triable either way. Magistrates/Crown court.
10. 5 years max prison sentence, or fine.…read more

Slide 6

Preview of page 6

Here's a taster:

10 Things s20 ­ Malicious Wounding + GBH
1. s20 of OAPA 1861.
2. AR - Serious harm. (R v Saunders.) Can be physical/psychiatric
harm. D must cause result or actions significant contribution to
result. (R v Birstow ­ said there was no difference between cause
or inflict.)
3. Result, serious wound or Grievous bodily harm. Wound dictionary
definition in JCC v Eisenhower; `Cutting of skin causing external
bleeding.' Internal injury/bleeding not wound but GBH.
4. Serious bruising on baby in R v Bollam, serious sexual disease (HIV)
in R v Dica ­ this is s20.
5. MR, direct intent or subjective recklessness.
6. Intend only SOME harm but not serious harm. (s18)
7. D has Direct intent to cause SOME harm (unlucky turned out
serious)or Subjective recklessness; knew risk of some harm + took
risk. (unlucky turned out serious)
8. In R v Parmenter; threw baby in air causing some injury to baby.
Knew risk of some harm + took it.
9. Triable either way. Magistrates/Crown court.
10. 5 years max prison sentence, or fine.…read more

Slide 7

Preview of page 7
Preview of page 7

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all resources »