Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Trespass to the Person (False Imprisonment
False imprisonment is an act…
Trespass to the Person
-
Battery:
Battery may be defined as the direct and intentional application of force by the defendant to the claimant without lawful justification. (Fagan v MPC)Intentional Act:
- act must be intentional: Letang v Cooper
- can be reckless: Iqbal v Prison Officer's Association
- Needn't intend harm only the contact: Wilson v Pringle
- Can transfer malice: Livingstone v MOD
Direct (all below count as direct contact) link between Ds act and damage
- R v Coatesworth - Spitting at C counted
- Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner - drove over foot
- DPP v K: Suphuric Acid in dryer
Application of Force
- Cole v Turner - more than: least possible touching of another
- spitting Coatesworth counted
- Nash v Sheen - colouring hair without consent = force
Hostility:
- no need for ill-will simple lack of consent = hostility Wilson v Pringle
- Collins v Willcock - beyond the bounds of normal social conduct
Unlawfulness
- Defence if their actions are lawfully justified: consent, self-defence, , necessity, statutory authority
Assault:
An act of the D that produces in the claimant a reasonable expectation of immediate, unlawful force R v Beasley
Causes the apprehention of immediate battery Collins v Wilcock
- Act
- R v Wilson - words can amount to assault
- Tuberville v Savage - words can negate an assault
Read v Coker - "Get out or I'll break your neck" - conditional but immediate
- Apprehention:
- R v St George: pointed gun (unloaded but didn't matter) reasonable to have apprehended immediate battery
- Thomas v MUN - objective - even it frightened, in an armored vehicle
- Immediate
- R v Ireland - Silence can be sufficient - still held to be immediate as no idea where he was - could be immediate
Defences
- Self-defence
- Consent -
- Necessity
- Statutory authority
- Reasonable chastisement
False Imprisonment
False imprisonment is an act of the defendant that directly and intentionally causes the
complete restriction of the claimant's liberty without lawful justification.
Act not an omission - Sayer v Harlow - accidentally locking someone in a room not false imprisonment
Direct and Intentional
Intention is essential, must have to want to 100% deprive someone of their liberty
- R v Governor of Brockhill Prison ex p Evans (No 2) - Intention to restrain
Complete Restriction
Bird v Jones - bridge closed, no imprisonment free to use another route
Murray v MOD - Don't need to have knowledge of the imprisonment for it to be so
Davidson v CC of North Wales - words enough - do not leave or I will kill you
False
Robinson v Balmain - 1p to go through the turnstiles to access the ferry - 1p payable to leave too - not false imprisonment, a contractual relationship
Defences
Consent
- Medical treatment - always consent to battery - Airedale NHS Trust v Bland
- Sport? - R v Brown
- Cannot consent where harm - afront to the public conscience
-
Self-Defence: protecting people/property - Cockcroft v Smith, force must be proportionate
-
The Rule in Wilkinson v Downton
- joke made - caused nervous shock
- defendant can be responsible for deliberately inflicting harm on the claimant