Chapter 7 - Non-fatal offences against the person

Unlawful Assault - s 42 Offences Against the Person Act 1861

An assault is committed where D intentionally or recklessly causes V to apprehend imminent unlawful personal violence.

Actus Reus

• Conduct: Any conduct, including words alone

• Result: V apprehends imminent unlawful personal violence

• No physical contact required

Key points:

• “Violence” includes any non-consensual touching, even minor

• Focus is on the effect on V, not the likelihood of violence

• Threats must be imminent (future threats alone are insufficient)

• Imminence is assessed using a subjective/objective approach

• Assault may be committed:

  • By words alone

  • Indirectly (e.g. threat via another person or animal)

  • By omission, where D is under a duty to act

Mens Rea

• Intention or recklessness as to causing V to apprehend imminent unlawful violence

• D must foresee the possibility of that apprehension

Key Case Facts

• Constanza: Repeated threatening letters caused V to apprehend violence “at some point not excluding the immediate future” → assault established

• Venna: Confirms intention or recklessness is sufficient mens rea

Distinguishing Features

• No touching

• Concerned with anticipation, not injury

• Lowest rung on the non-fatal offences ladder

Unlawful Battery - Statutory Provision: s 42 Offences Against the Person Act 1861

A battery is committed where D intentionally or recklessly applies unlawful personal violence to V.

Actus Reus

• Physical contact is required

• Contact can be very slight

• Includes touching clothing worn by V

• V need not be aware of the contact at the time

Battery can be committed:

• Directly (hitting, pushing)

• Indirectly (throwing objects, spitting, causing a third party to impact V)

• By omission, where D is under a duty to act

Mens Rea

• Intention or recklessness as to applying unlawful force

Key Case Facts

• Thomas: Touching clothing worn by V constitutes touching the person

• DPP v K: Acid placed in hand dryer → indirect battery

• Santana-Bermudez: Failure to warn police officer about needles → battery by omission

Distinguishing Features

• Requires physical contact

• Assault = apprehension only

• Battery = application of force

Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm (ABH) - s 47 Offences Against the Person Act 1861

An assault or battery which occasioned actual bodily harm.

Actus Reus

1. A base offence of assault or battery

2. Harm amounting to actual bodily harm

3. A causal link between the assault/battery and the harm

Actual Bodily Harm:

• Any injury that is more than transient or trifling

• Can include psychiatric injury, but not mere emotions

Mens Rea

• Mens rea for the assault or battery only

• No requirement that D intended or foresaw ABH

Key Case Facts

• Constanza: Assault + psychiatric injury → ABH

• Confirms that harm need not be physical

Distinguishing Features

• First offence requiring actual injury

• Constructive liability: harm need not be foreseen

• More serious than battery; less serious than s 20

Malicious Wounding or Inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm - s 20 Offences Against the Person Act 1861

D unlawfully and maliciously wounds or inflicts grievous bodily harm on another.

Actus Reus

• Wound: Break in the continuity of the skin (inner and outer layers)
  OR

• Infliction of GBH: Really serious bodily harm

GBH can include:

• Serious physical injury

• Serious psychiatric injury

Mens Rea

• Maliciously = intention or recklessness as to some harm

• D need not intend or foresee serious harm

Key Case Principles (from chapter)

• Mens rea is lower than s 18

• Recklessness suffices

Distinguishing Features

• Injury must be really serious

• No intent to cause GBH required

• More serious than s 47; less serious than s 18

Wounding or Causing Grievous Bodily Harm with Intent - s 18 Offences Against the Person Act 1861

D unlawfully and maliciously wounds or causes grievous bodily harm, with intent to:

• Cause grievous bodily harm, or

• Resist or prevent lawful arrest

Actus Reus

• Wounding OR

• Causing GBH

“Causing” is broader than “inflicting” and includes indirect causation.

Mens Rea

• Specific intent to cause grievous bodily harm
  OR

• Intent to resist or prevent lawful apprehension

Recklessness is not sufficient.

Distinguishing Features

• Highest non-fatal offence

• Requires specific intent

• Maximum sentence: life imprisonment

seperate offences

Strangulation (s75A)

Harassment

• s2 Harassment

• s4 Fear of Violence

Racially or Religiously Aggravated Offences

Torture (s134)

Slavery (s1)

Why is consent treated more restrictively for serious offences than for assault or battery?

Because offences under ss 47, 20, and 18 involve serious bodily harm, the law does not permit individuals to consent freely to such harm in all circumstances. Even where:

• consent is communicated,

• informed,

• free from duress,

it will still be invalid unless the conduct falls within a recognised category. This reflects a public policy limitation on bodily autonomy.

What categories of conduct have been recognised as permitting consent to serious harm?

The courts have recognised, in certain circumstances, the following categories:

• Surgery

• Body modification

• Religious flagellation

• Sport

• Horseplay

• Sexual pleasure (very narrowly and controversially)

Each category is subject to limits, and recognition does not mean consent is automatically valid in every case.

What is the position on consent to serious harm for sexual gratification?

Following Brown, and now reinforced by legislation, individuals cannot consent to serious harm inflicted solely for sexual pleasure.

This rule:

• Aims to protect vulnerable persons from abuse.

• Restricts autonomy even in apparently consensual relationships.

• Remains one of the most controversial aspects of this area of law.