Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
OAPA - Coggle Diagram
OAPA
BATTERY
Key Facts:
- authority in common law
- result crime
- tort offence
- confirmed separation from the offence of battery s.39 Criminal Justice Act 1988 ; supported by Collins v Wilcock (1984) and R v Nelson (2013)
Actus Reus
D caused unlawful personal violence with V
Can be mere physical contact (Paulkner v Talbot 1983) violence isn't necessary; 'law cannot draw the line between degrees of violence' = Goff LJ in Collins v Wilcock (1984)
Can be committed through omission
- Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner (1969)
**- DPP v Sanatana Bermudez (2003)
No need for battery to be hostile
- R v Brown (1994)
Battery includes clothes
- R v Day (1845)
Not necessary that battery be directly caused
- R v Martin (1881) ; charged with GBH and thus battery
- DPP v K (1990)
Potentially a claim of psychiatric injury; R v Ireland (1998)
'caused'
Factual and legal causation applies
Mens Rea
D intended or was reckless as to causing physical contact with V'intention'
- direct = Moloney (1985)
- indirect = Woollin (1999)
'reckless'
-
ASSUALT
Key Facts:
Definition = any conduct by D, intentionally or recklessly, which causes V to apprehend immediate and unlawful physical contact
- definition used in R v Ireland (1998)
- authority in common law
- tort offence
- result crime
- confirmed separation from the offence of battery s.39 Criminal Justice Act 1988 ; supported by Collins v Wilcock (1984) and R v Nelson (2013)
Actus Reus
D caused V to apprehend immediate unlawful physical contact
'immedicacy'
V must believe D is about to make good on a threat ; subjective
- Smith v Chief Superintendent of Woking Police Station (1983)
- Constanza (1997)
D's ability to carry out threat in some instances doesn't matter
- Logdon v DPP (1976) ; V believed the gun was real
D's words neutralise the threat in D's actions
- Tuberville v Savage (1669); assize courts
D's words as a conditional threat can be assault
- Read v Coker (1853) confirmed this new rule against the old ruling in Blake v Barnard (1840)
'caused'
Factual and Legal causation applies
Mens Rea
D intended or was reckless to, V's apprehension of immediate unlawful physical contact
- R v Vienna (1976) confirmed that recklessness would suffice'intention'
- direct intention ; Moloney (1985)
- indirect intention ; Woollin (1999)
'recklessness'
- R v G (2003)
-
-
-
REFORM
Law Commission proposals
- replacement for s.20 = ' intentionally causing serious injury'
- replacement for s.20 = 'recklessly causing serious injury'
- replacement for s.47 = 'intentionally or recklessly causing injury'
- aggravated assault = new offence and triable in summary only; max sentence is 6 months
- replacement for battery = physical assault , triable in summary only and max sentence is 6 months
- replacement for assault = threatened assault, triable in summary only and max sentence is 6 months