Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byHester Nash Modified over 8 years ago
1
Battery Actus Reus - Ireland – AR = Application of unlawful physical force to another
2
Battery – Actus Reus Ireland – AR = Application of unlawful physical force to another
3
Actus Reus – the Force Force can be slight E.g. hitting someone, throwing a drink at someone V does not need to suffer any pain or injury But, typical injuries are minor bruising, grazing, small cuts Collins v Willcock – “any touching of another person, however slight, may amount to battery” E.g – slap, kiss, throwing a drink over someone Thomas – touching clothes amounted to battery Has to be an act not an omission: – Fagan – can be a continuing act – applying unlawful force by driving on to police officer’s foot – by leaving the car there meant the unlawful force continued up until the time D had mens rea
4
Actus Reus - Unlawful Force Some force may be lawful: If victim consents to the force Sports such as Rugby Surgical procedures, visits to the dentist Everyday physical contact Implied consent in normal social situations – e.g. tapping someone on the shoulder Collins v Willcock – all those who move about society have given implied consent to the physical contacts of ordinary life as they have exposed themselves to bodily contact – e.g. jostling in a supermarket/underground station, hand seized in friendship at a party (or even a back slap within reason) But – if contact exceeds what is generally held to be acceptable (hand squeezed tightly at length until it hurts, repeatedly slapping someone on the back) force may be unlawful
5
Actus Reus – Indirect Batteries Battery can be inflicted indirectly – D causes force to be applied even though he doesn’t touch the victim DPP v K – battery can be indirect – schoolboy put acid in a hot air drier and another pupil was injured Haystead – man punched a woman who dropped her baby – battery on the baby – D had used the woman as a weapon to injure the baby (n.b would also be liable under transferred malice)
6
Mens Rea Venna – MR = Intent or subjective recklessness to apply force to another D must intend or see the risk of unlawful force being applied to another Don’t need any intent or recklessness as to harm – only the unlawful force Latimer – transferred malice – D intentionally hit A with a belt, belt rebounded and hit B, D had MR for the attack on A which was transferred to B. Transferred malice only applies where MR and AR are for the same crime
7
Battery Questions 1.Was there force? What was it? 2.Was the force unlawful? 3.Did D intend or was he subjectively reckless to apply force?
Similar presentations
© 2024 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.