← Offences Against the Person Cases Export Options Alphabetize Word-Def Delimiter Tab Comma Custom Def-Word Delimiter New Line Semicolon Custom Data Copy and paste the text below. It is read-only. Select All Smith v Chief Superintendent of Woking Police Station For assault, fear of immediate force is necessary. This is not 'instantaneous', this means 'imminent'. It is also how V feels at the time. If V feel as if they will be subject to force immediately then it counts. Tuberville v Savage Words can prevent actions from being an assault if they neutralise the action. Light If V genuinely believes that an assault is about to occur, even though D has used words which counteract his actions, D will still be guilty. Collins v Willcock For battery, force can be very slight. Thomas Even touching V's clothes can be battery. Fagan A battery may be committed through a continuing act. Martin, Haystead and DPP v K (Three cases) battery committed through an indirect act. Santana-Bermudez Battery committed by ommission. Majewski If D is intoxicated voluntarily, then this is sufficient for the mens rea if it is recklessness. Miller S47 - Any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of V. T v DPP Even momentary loss of consciousness can be s47. Smith (Michael) Even cutting V's hair can be s47 (it has to be enough for the injury to be 'actual' rather than 'trivial or insignificant') Chan Fook Psychiatric harm can be 'actual bodily harm' (s47) so long as it's more than mere emotions such as fear. Must be an identifiable clinical condition. Burstow Approved Chan Fook. S18, 20 and 47 include psychiatric harm. Roberts D need only be reckless/intent either unlawful force or V to feel fear of unlawful force for s47. He needn't intend/be reckless as to whether ABH is caused. Savage and Parmenter Confirmed the decision in Roberts. Eisenhower A 'wound' means a cut or break in the continuity of the whole skin. Wood D's collar bone was broken, but as the skin was intact it was not a wound. Smith GBH = 'really serious harm' Saunders GBH = 'serious harm'. 'Really' isn't necessary. Bollom V's injuries should be assessed according to health and age. What is only transient on a 30 year old, may be far more serious on a 3 year old. Dica GBH can be biological. Lewis Threats can be a technical assault. The word 'inflict' used in s20 does not mean there has to be bodily contact. Burstow 'Inflict' for s20 GBH doesn't even require a technical assault. It only needs to be shown that D's actions have lead to the consequence of V suffering GBH. Cunningham s20 - 'maliciously' means intention or foreseen that the level of harm may have occurred and taken the risk anyway. Parmenter Confirmed that Cunningham's definition of 'maliciously' shall be used in all statutory defences in which the definition uses the word 'maliciously'. Morrison D can commit a s18 offence through resisting arrest. It needs to be proved that D had specific intent to prevent or resist arrest, but only that they were reckless as to whether s18 injuries were caused. Williams D should be judged according to his genuine mistaken view of the facts in regards to self-defence. A-G reference (no 2 of 1983) (1984) Someone who fears an attack can make preparations to defend themselves, even if the preparations involve beaches of law. Clegg Excessive force used in self-defence Martin (Anthony) Psychiatric disorders cannot be taken into account when deciding if the force was reasonable in self-defence. Cairns Confirmed Martin (Anthony). Donovan An example of consent. If V agrees to the injury then there is no crime, so technically consent isn't a defence. Slingsby An extreme example of consent. V died from her injuries, but as she consented to the small cuts that D gave here, there was no assault and therefore no unlawful act for manslaughter. Tabassum For the defence of consent, it is not a defence if the consent is not true consent. If D has deceived V into consenting, it is not a defence. Olugboja If D has consented to something through fear of the defendant, then it is not true consent and therefore not a defence. Wilson v Pringle The everyday jostlings of life are not unlawful force. Barnes Where an injury occurs during a sports match, criminal convictions should be reserved for particularly grave situations. A-G reference (no 6 of 1980) (1981) C/A held that it's not in the public interest to allow people to cause bodily harm to each other for no good reason. There are exceptions such as surgery, games, sports etc (the etc added to show that the list is not exhaustive). Brown Sado-masochistic encounters are decided on a matter of public policy. Society should be protected against the cult of violence. Wilson D was found not guilty after he branded his name on his wife's bum, even though she needed medical attention. Jones Mistaken belief in consent, as long as it's genuine, is a defence to an assault.