LAW OF TORT

Lecture-XIII
Trespass to Person
Battery

Omer Abdullah
Lecturer, Department of Law
 OBJECTIVES

To understand the advance To Explain battery and its

concept of Trespass to person essentials

2
 INTRODUCTION

Battery is the intentional use of force to another person without legal

justification. In other words battery is the actual striking of, to another

person, or touching him in a rude, angry, revengeful or in insulting

manner
 EXPLANATION

In both criminal and civil law, "battery" is the intentional touching of, or
application of force to, the body of another person in a harmful or offensive
manner (and without consent). A battery is often confused with an assault,
which is merely the act of threatening a battery, or of placing another in fear
or apprehension of an impending and immediate battery. A battery is almost
always preceded by an assault, which is why the terms are often used
transitionally or combined, as in "assault and battery."
 CIVIL BATTERY (TORT)

A battery is an intentional tort, as opposed to an act resulting

from negligence. The elements to establish the tort of battery are
the same as for criminal battery (details below), excepting that
criminal intent need not be present.
 CIVIL BATTERY (TORT)

A battery is an intentional tort, as opposed to an act resulting

from negligence. The elements to establish the tort of battery are
the same as for criminal battery (details below), excepting that
criminal intent need not be present.
ELEMENTS OF BATTERY

1. Intent

2. Contact

3. Harm
 INTENT

 It is not essential that criminal intent to cause

injury, necessarily, but intent to commit the act
of battery
 CONTACT

The second essential of battery is non-

consensual contact with the individual or

his/her effects, such as clothing or body

 ACTUAL HARM

 It is necessary to constitute the battery caused

actual harm meaning physical, mental, or

emotional, not limited to just physical harm

 CASE LAW

Cole V. Turner (1704) 6 Mod. 149

It was held that, “the least touching of another in anger is a

battery”.
Explanation:
Battery consists in touching another’s person hostility or
against his will, however slightly. It is the actual use of
force to the person of another, done without justification,
hostility..
BATTERY IN SPECIAL SITUATIONS

1. Medical Battery

2. Toxic Battery

3. Sports Battery

4. Domestic Violence
 MEDICAL BATTERY

Virtually all states have recognized, either by express statute or common law, the
right to receive information about one's medical condition, the treatment choices,
risks associated with the treatments, and prognosis. The information must be in plain
language terms that can readily be understood and in sufficient amounts such that a
patient is able to make an "informed" decision about his or her health care. If the
patient has received this information, any consent to treatment that is given will be
presumed to be an "informed consent." A doctor who fails to obtain informed
consent for non-emergency treatment may be charged with a civil and/or criminal
offense, including a battery, for the unauthorized touching of the plaintiff's person.
 TOXIC BATTERY

Companies that manufacture chemicals that are known to be volatile or

known to ultimately result in human contact are vulnerable to such claims.
They may be sued for illegal disposal of toxic/hazardous materials as well as
the tort of toxic battery if persons are harmed by leached chemicals or fumes
in the air, ground, or water. The intent was not to harm others, but to dump
the material in an illegal manner or location. This is a good example of gross
negligence or recklessness so egregious as to constitute the requisite intent to
commit battery under law.
 CASE LAW
Gulden v. Crown Zellerbach Corp. (9th Circuit, 1989)

In this case the court held that exposing workers to PCBs (known carcinogens
and harmful agents) at 500 times the maximum exposure allowed under EPA
standards could constitute a battery.

The tort of toxic battery also became an element in many of the tobacco and
breast implant cases. Obviously, such cases often involve multiple plaintiffs
and multiple defendants, and may become class action suits in the case of
widespread exposure to harm.
 SPORTS

Most sports injuries, which are common in competitive, contact

sports, are accidental. However, viable causes of action have
been found in cases where sports players used excessive force in
their tactics, to the detriment or harm of other players. Of course,
the infamous fights among hockey players have resulted in
numerous multi-party claims for battery.
 CASE LAW
Haystead V Director Of Public Prosecutions [2000] 3 ALL ER 850

The defendant Haystead had punched W twice in the face while she was holding her
child, and as a direct result of that the child fell from her arms and hit his head on
the floor. Counsel for the defendant submitted that in order to have committed the
actus reus of battery in the offence of assault against the child by beating, the
defendant had to have used force directly to the child’s person, that a direct
application of force required the defendant to have had direct physical contact with
the complainant either through his body, for example, a punch, or through a
medium controlled by his actions, for example, a weapon, and that was not made
 CASE LAW
Fagan v. Metropolitan Police Commissioner

In this case Fagan was asked by an officer to park his car. He didn't realize that the car
had rolled onto the police officer foot at which point he was asked to move the car. He
responded with verbal abuse and turned off the engine before complying with the
request. The majority of the Court of Appeal held that there was a continuing positive
act starting from when he moved the car to when he turned it off and as such there was a
battery. Whereas Bridge J dissented saying it was an omission as he parked on the foot
accidentally (and thus there was no intent at that stage) and then simply omitted to
move the car, and so there was no battery.
 CASE LAW
Pratap Daji V. B.B. And C.I. Ryl.

The plaintiff entered a carriage on the defendant’s railway but by oversight failed to
purchase a ticket for his travel. At an intermediate station he asked for the ticket but
the same was refused, at another place, he was asked to get out of the carriage since
he didn’t have a ticket. On his refusal to get out, force was used to make him get out
of the carriage. In an action by him for his forcible removal, it was held that the use
of force was justified as he, being without a ticket was a trespasser. The defendants
were therefore, not liable.
 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ASSAULT AND
BATTERY

The most critical difference between the two charges is the presence of
physical contact. For a crime to be considered battery, the perpetrator
must make physical contact with the victim, whereas assault is not
necessarily physical. An assault could be attempting to injure someone,
making threats or pointing a weapon at someone. For example,
threatening to break someone's neck could be considered an assault.
Physically attacking someone and injuring their neck would be battery.
 POSITION IN PAKISTAN

Battery is mentioned in Pakistan Pinal code section 350

and it is punishable as such.
 DEFENSES

Self Defense:

A plea of self defense is a valid defense against

assault and battery, which means that the

plaintiff used the force only to save himself.

 DEFENSES (CONT..)

Parental or quasi-parental authority

Act done is exercise of parental or quasi-parental authority is

also a valid defense
 DEFENSES (CONT..)

Leave and License:

A man cannot complain of harm if he has given or obtained leave

and license by or from the plaintiff. “volenti non fit injuria”

Meaning: "to a willing person, no injury is done" or "no injury is

done to a person who consents"
 CONCLUSION

From the above discussion one can easily conclude that,

unlawful laying of hands or show of force to apprehend any

person for immediate grievous hurt, or actual use of force to

annoy any person are also actionable per see, under the tort of

assault and battery 25

26