CRIMINAL LAW II STUDYGUIDE 5

NON-FATAL OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON

1. Common Assault – assault and battery

An assault is any act which intentionally or possibly recklessly causes another person to
apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence. A battery on the other hand is the
infliction of unlawful force by one person upon another. The least touching of another will
suffice.

Trend to use the term 'assault' in a broad sense to include both assault and battery. As James J
stated in Fagan v MPC:

'Although "assault" is an independent crime and is to be treated as such, for practical

purposes today "assault" is generally synonymous with the term "battery", and is a term
used to mean the actual intended use of unlawful force to another person without his
consent.'

R v Brown [1993] 2 All ER 75

Cole v. Turner (1704) 6 Mod 149

(a) The Actus Reus: The actus reus of assault is any act which causes the victim to
apprehend an immediate infliction of violence, e.g. raising a fist or pointing a gun. See Logdon v
DPP [1976] Crim LR 121. The actus reus of battery on the other hand is unlawfully applying
physical force to another person. Fagan v. MPC [1969] 1 QB 439. Force may be applied
directly or indirectly.

R v Lamb [1967] 2 QB 981

Meade and Belt (1823) 1 Lew. C.C. 184
Smith v Superintendent of Woking Police Station [1983] Crim LR 323; 76 Cr.App.R. 234
R v Arobekieke [1988] Crim LR 314
R v. Wilson [1955] 1 WLR 493
R v. Constanza [1997] Crim L R 576
R v Ireland [1997] 3 WLR 534
Tuberville v Savage (1669) 1 Mod 3
Read v Coker (1853) 13 CB 850
Logdon v DPP [1976] Crim LR 121
R v. Bristow [1997] 2 WLR 34
DPP v K (a minor)[1990] 1 WLR 1067; 1 All ER 331
Donnelly v Jackman [1970] 1 All E.R. 987
Faulkner v Talbot [1981] 3 All ER 468
Collins v Wilcock [1984] 3 All ER 374
Haystead v DPP [2000] 3 All ER 690
 DPP v Santa-Bermudez (2004) 168 JP 373

(b) The Mens Rea: The mens rea for assault is that the defendant must have intentionally or
recklessly caused the victim to apprehend the immediate infliction of unlawful violence. The
mens rea for battery is that the defendant intentionally or recklessly applied unlawful force to the
victim.
R v Venna [1976] QB 421
R v Spratt [1990] 1 WLR 1073 ; [1991] 2 All ER 210
Majewski [1977] AC 443
R v Brown [1993] 2 All ER 75
DPP v. Parmenter [1991] 94 Cr App R 193

2. Aggravated Assault: Aggravated assault is a more serious form of threat than common
assault.
This category of assault includes:

(a) Assault occasioning actual bodily harm or grievous bodily harm

(see s. 49 of the Criminal (Offences) Act Cap. 8:01);
(b) Wounding or Inflicting grievous bodily harm (see section 50 of
the Criminal (Offences) Act, Cap. 8:01); and
(c) Wounding or causing grievous bodily harm with intent with intent
to cause grievous bodily harm (see section 57 of the Criminal
(Offences) Act, Cap. 8:01)
The choice of the charge is essentially based on the nature and extent of the injury.

(a) Assault occasioning actual bodily harm or grievous bodily harm

R v Hopley (1860) 2 F&F 202

A v UK (1999) 27 EHRR 611
R v Roberts (1971) 56 Cr App R 95
R v Miller [1954] 2 All ER 529
R v Chan-Fook [1994] 2 All ER 552
R v Ireland [1997] 4 All ER 225
R v Constanza [1997] Crim LR 576
DPP v Smith [2006] EWHC 94
R v Chan-Fook [1994] 2 All ER 552
R v Morris [1998] 1 Cr App R 386
Burstow [1997] 3 WLR 534; 4 All ER 225
R v Sanders [1985] Crim LR 230
Dhaliwal [2006] 2 Cr App R 348)
R v Ashman (1858) 1 F & F 88
Birmingham [2002] EWCA Crim 2608
 R v Bollom (2004) 2 Cr App R 6

(b) Wounding or Inflicting grievous bodily harm

Moriarty v Brookes (1834) 6 C & P 684

R v Smith (1837) 8 C & P 173
M'Loughlin (1838) 8 C & P 635
C (a minor) v Eisenhower [1984] QB 331
DPP v Smith [1961] AC 290
Bollom [2004] 2 Cr App R 50
R v Martin (1881) 8 QBD 54
R v Clarence (1889) 22 QB 23
Wood (1830) 1 Mood CC 278
R v Wilson [1984] AC 242
R v Brady [2006] EWCA Crim 2413
DPP v W [2006] EWHC 92 (Admin)
R v Parmenter [1991] 94 Cr App R 193
Morrison [2012] 2 Cr App R (S) 594 (101)
Marsh [2012] 2 Cr App R (S) 178 (31),

(c) Wounding or causing grievous bodily harm with intent with intent to cause grievous
bodily harm
R v Mandair [1994] 2 All ER 715, held that "causing" was "wider or at least not narrower than
the word 'inflict'."
Belfon [1976] 3 All ER 46
Morrison [1989] Cr App R 17
Cunningham [1957] 2 QB 396; Crim LR 326

3. Other Non-fatal offences against person

Other non-fatal offences include: administering poison; false imprisonment
Stephens v. Myers(1830) 4 C & P 349
R v Venna [1976] QB 421
R v Spratt [1990] 1 WLR 1073 ;[1991] 2 All ER 210
4. The Defence of Consent: Consent is a defence to a charge of assault or battery but is
irrelevant where actual bodily harm is either intended or caused. Special considerations apply in
cases involving sports; surgery, piercing and tattooing; vigorous sex; and horseplay.
Brown [1993] 2 All ER 75
AG Reference (No. 6 of 1980) [1981] QB 715 ; 2 All ER 1057
R v. Wilson [1996] 3 WLR 125 ; Crim LR 573
R v. Barnes [2005] 1 WLR 910; EWCA Crim 3246
R v Cato [1976]1 WLR 110 ; 1 All ER 260
R v Leach [1969]
R v Boyea [1992]Crim LR 574
R v Donovan [1934] 2 KB 498
Wilson v Pringle | [1986] 2 All ER 440
Donnelly v Jackman [1970] 1 All ER 987.
R v Clarence (1889) 22 QB 23
Dica [2004] EWCA Crim 1103
Slingsby [1995] Crim LR 571
Jones (1986) 83 Cr App R 375

Nature of the consent: Consent must be free and not induced by threats, duress or fraud or
mental incapacity.

Burrell v Harmer [1967] Crim LR 169