battery and ABH-criminal

AR- element 1 which is unlawful force

collins v wilcock

thomas

dpp v k

haystead

martin

collins v wilcock- infliction of unlawful force

thomas- touching someones clothes is sufficient for it to be a battery

dpp v k-force can be indirectly applied

haystead-indirect act (same as martin)

MR

venna

dpp v majewkski

venna- applying unlawful physical force to another or recklessness

MR FOR ABH

miller

chan fook

t v dpp

dpp v smith

AR is the same as either assault or batter depends which one goes w the scenario

miller-hurt or injury that interferes with health or comfort

chan fook- pyschological injury that is a clinical condition

t v dpp- loss of consciousness even temp is enough for actual harm

dpp v smith- cutting substantial amount of hair is actual harm

r v savage

r v roberts

savage- could forsee that some harm will happen

roberts- d had intention and was reckless as to assault or batter