1. Trespass

2. Trespass
= direct interference with another party's rights by an intentional act
Three types of trespass:
trespass to the person
trespass to land
trespass to property
Actionable per se
Trespass is direct interference with another party's rights by an intentional act
Three types – what are they?
actionable per se –which means? no need to show damage > The court does not require the claimant to show that they have suffered physical harm or damage to property, but only that that her rights have been infringed.

3. Trespass to the person Assault Battery False imprisonment
Three types of Trespass to the person – which are
Trespass to the person as we have just said, like all forms of trespass, must be committed intentionally.
This distinguishes it from negligence.
Assault
Battery
False imprisonment

4. Battery D intentionally applied unlawful force to another person
The “invasion of the physical person of the claimant” (Lord Hoffmann)
No need to show C suffered any injury
D’s intention is not relevant
Physical contacts “generally acceptable in the conduct of everyday life” (Goff LJ) are excluded
D directly and intentionally applied unlawful force to another person
This means that the act must be committed intentionally > for example if the train breaks suddenly and the defendant falls onto another passenger, that is obviously an unintentional act and would not be battery.
This tort deals with the claimant right to be free of unjustified physical interference: battery is the “invasion of the physical person of the claimant” (Lord Hoffmann)
No need to show C suffered any injury > Obviously if the defendant stabs, shoots or punches someone, that is a battery as is rape or sexual assault – but any unwanted physical touching can amount to a battery, a pat on the back, touching someone’s arm or an unwanted kiss
D’s intention is not relevant – the fact that the contact was the result of a practical joke or intended to convey affection is not a defence.
Nonetheless, Physical contacts “generally acceptable in the conduct of everyday life” (Goff LJ) are excluded > for example being pushed against other people when entering a tube train
> This approach has been criticised from a feminsit point of view since views of what is “acceptable in the conduct of every day life” are defined by a judiciary which is overwhelmingly male and middle-aged

5. Assault
D committed a positive act which made C think D was about to intentionally apply unlawful force to his body
Assault and battery often occur together
Requires C to have a “reasonable apprehension of immediate and direct application of physical force”
Not all threats constitute assault
Traditionally threatening words needed to be accompanied by an intimidating gesture
D committed a positive act which made C think D was about to intentionally apply unlawful force to his body
Assault protects the claimant who fears or apprehends a battery
Unlike battery, the wrong of assault lies not in unwanted physical contact, but in the anticipation of such contact
Assault and battery usually occur together, the immediate anticipation of a battery (an assault, such as someone preparing to punch) is usually followed by a battery (actually being hit)
However, this is not always the case
If the defendant points a loaded gun at the claimant that is an actionable assault > even if he then changes his mind, shoots and misses or a third party intervenes, meaning that no battery takes place
Assault requires the C TO HAVE a “reasonable apprehension of immediate and direct application of physical force”
So, if someone is shot while they are asleep, there is battery but no assault. Why? No moment when the victim fears the battery, at no point does he think he is going to be the victim of a battery – it just happens
Furthermore, it’s important to realise that not all threats constitute assault > if the D is clearly not in a position to carry out his threat, that is not an assault (for example he states that he is about to shoot someone but clearly has no gun and no access to one) > empty threat
Traditionally threatening words needed to be accompanied by an intimidating gesture > in order to distinguish insults from serious threats, although this is imposed less strictly today

6. False imprisonment
D committed a positive act that directly resulted in the claimant's freedom of movement being restricted
The restriction of movement can be intentional or reckless
D committed a positive act that directly and intentionally resulted in the claimant's freedom of movement being completely restricted or restricted to a defined area (completely - no FOM, eg arrest, a defined area = keeping someone in a room) – there cannot be any reasonable means of escape
The restriction of movement can be intentional or reckless > D locks a door meaning that C is trapped in a room, that is FI if he did it intentionally (he knew C was in room and wanted to trap him) or recklessly (he suspected that C was still in the room and didn’t care). But can’t be committed negligently.
(No requirement that any harm suffered except the false imprisonment)

7. Trespass to the person: defences
Lawful justification or excuse
Consent
a competent adult can refuse to give consent even for life-saving medical treatment
Necessity
The Mental Capacity Act 2005
Self-defence
Must be proportionate to the force exercised against D
A common element of each of the trespâss torts is that the defendnat must not have a lawful justification of excuse for their actions.
This usually operates as a defence to a claim, with the onus being on the defendant to establish that they can justify or excuse their actions.
For example, if a the defendant was carrying out a lawful arrest, this would obviously be a lawful justification for restraining a defendants freedom of movement.
The other defences are
Consent - if C has agreed to be touched in that way.
Issues often arise in relation to medical treatment.
A doctor or surgeon does not commit battery provided that the patient has given valid consent. However a competent adult can refuse to give consent even if treatment is necessary to save their own life or the life of their unborn child.
Necessity: previously a common-law defence in medical cases where an unconscious patient could not give consent – today codified so that medical professional can treat a temporarily incapacitated patient as long as they reasonably believe that the procedure is in the patient’s best interests

8. Trespass to land The defendant:
crossed the boundary onto land possessed by C or
caused some object or matter to move directly onto land possessed by C
when he had no lawful justification for doing so
Trespass to land – what is it (both types)? D
crossed the boundary onto land possessed by C or
caused some object or matter to move directly onto land possessed by B (can include animals _straying livestock or dangerous, usually not cats or dogs, but can be if sent or carelessly allowed)
when he had no lawful justification for doing so
C must be in possession of the land at the time of the alleged trespass (landowner, tenant, or owner-occupier)
In some cases trespass to land can be a crime _ squatting in a residential property (trespass with the intent to reside)
Simply being on another person’s non-residential property without their permission isn’t usually a crime. The police can take action if squatters commit other crimes when entering or staying in a property.
Crimes include:causing damage when entering the property causing damage while in the property not leaving when they’re told to by a court stealing from the property using utilities like electricity or gas without permission

9. Trespass to land Defences
It is not a defence that the trespass was an "honest mistake"
Several other defences exist e.g. making lawful use of a right of way or having a license.
Defences
An "honest mistake" by A is not a defence to the tort of trespass to land. (in book says it is??)
Many other defences such as making lawful use of a right of way. (droit de passage) or having a license – permission has been given by the possessor of the land

10. Trespass to goods
D intentionally interfered with C's goods /chattels (without lawful justification)
D intentionally or carelessly (don't say) interfered with C's goods (without lawful justification) (- includes directly damaging or taking possession of them can even be just moving them- yes wheelclamp or beating cat, no putting down poison for cat or closing carpark gate)

11. Trespass - remedies Damages Injunction Remedies
damages - where there is n loss or damage, these may be nominal (trespass is actionable per se)
They may also be
market value or goods or a reasonable sum for use of land/property
Injunctions
Order to return goods