Torts: Trespass to Person

What Is a Tort?

• Tort law governs horizontal relationships between individuals where private parties sue each other for breaches of obligations imposed by law, not agreement.
• Torts are part of private law, with obligations arising out of common law, not consent.

Trespass to the Person

• A category of intentional torts involving direct interference with a person.
• Includes:
  • Battery: Direct and intentional physical contact.
  • Assault: Causing fear of imminent physical contact.
  • False imprisonment: Unlawful restraint of personal liberty.

Battery: Key Elements

• Definition: Intentionally applying force to another person without consent or lawful justification.
• Key Elements:
  1. Intentional act -- purpose or recklessness.
  2. Direct physical contact -- need not be violent or cause damage.
  3. Lack of consent -- explicit or implied.
  4. Actionable per se -- no need to prove damage.

Intention in Battery

• Includes purposeful acts and reckless conduct.
• If the act was unintentional, plaintiff must sue in negligence, not trespass.
• Examples:
  • Throwing a firework that is then passed on is battery.
  • Intending to hit someone but hitting another is still battery.
  • Stage-diving and hitting someone is battery unless implied consent applies.

Directness

• Modern view: Directness is less important than intention and lack of consent.
• Relevant to determine if a tort is battery or negligence.
• Examples:
  • Striking a horse causing a rider to fall is battery.
  • A pitfall trap is negligence, not battery.

Consent

• Types of Consent:
  • Express: Given explicitly.
  • Implied: From context, e.g., sports, daily interactions.
  • Deemed/Constructive: Inferred for legal/practical reasons.
• Limits of Consent:
  • Must be informed.
  • Cannot be presumed in intimate acts.
  • Some acts exceed implied consent in sports/public conduct.

Application Examples

• Kissing a sleeping person: Battery.
• Hard rugby tackle: No battery unless excessive, due to implied consent.
• Flicking someone's ear: Likely battery.
• Spitting on someone: Battery.

Key Cases and Quotes

• $Fowler v Lanning$: Battery requires intent or negligence; onus on plaintiff to plead one or the other.
• $Beals v Hayward$: No battery where shooting was unintentional and not negligent.
• $Letang v Cooper$: Distinction between intentional torts and negligence, not direct vs indirect harm.
• $Re F$: Consent and bodily integrity central; necessity can justify contact without consent sometimes.
• $S v G$: Lack of true consent treated as part of the cause of action for battery (not just a defense).

Summary: What is a Tort?

• Civil wrong based on obligations created by common law (not agreement).

Summary: Key Elements of Battery

1. Intentional application of force.
2. Direct physical contact.
3. Without consent or legal justification.
4. Actionable without proof of damage.

Assault: Overview

• Definition: An overt act that intentionally causes another person to reasonably apprehend the imminent infliction of battery.
• Clarifications:
  • No physical contact required.
  • Apprehension must be reasonable: subjectively experienced and objectively reasonable.
  • Threat must relate to imminent harm, not future or conditional harm without immediacy.

Elements of the Tort of Assault

1. Overt act by the defendant (words, gestures, or both).
2. Intention to cause apprehension (or recklessness).
3. Plaintiff must apprehend imminent force; apprehension must be reasonable.

Examples and Key Cases

• $R v St George$:
  • Pointing an unloaded pistol is still assault if the victim doesn’t know it’s unloaded.
  • Depends on what the plaintiff reasonably apprehended, not the actual capacity to carry out the threat.
• $Police v Greaves$:
  • A conditional threat can be assault if it creates a reasonable and immediate apprehension of harm.
• $Read v Coker$: Words plus menacing actions constitute assault.
• $Tuberville v Savage$:
  • Words can negate actions. No assault if words negated the threat of immediate harm.
• $R v Wilson$:
  • Indirect threats can be assault if they cause a reasonable apprehension of harm.

Hypotheticals and Application

1. Gun not loaded? Still assault if plaintiff reasonably believed it was and feared immediate harm.
2. Conditional threat? Can be assault if threat is immediate and plaintiff reasonably believes harm will follow.
3. $Tuberville revisited$? Probably not an assault if signals no immediate harm.
4. "Boys, get your weapons out"? Could be assault if plaintiff reasonably fears imminent harm, even if defendant is unarmed.

Practical Considerations

• Apprehension must be of immediate harm.
• Words alone can amount to assault if threatening but may also negate.
• Plaintiff’s belief must be reasonable: objective and subjective assessment.

Summary: Assault vs Battery

• Assault
  • Contact: No contact required
  • Focus: Apprehension of harm
  • Test: Reasonable belief in imminent contact
  • Damage required?: No – actionable per se
  • Consent?: Must be absent or not implied
• Battery
  • Contact: Requires physical contact
  • Focus: Application of force
  • Test: Intentional, direct, and non-consensual contact
  • Damage required?: No – actionable per se
  • Consent?: Must be absent or not implied

Introduction to Torts: Analysing a Factual Scenario

• Scenario: Polly shot by Dora in the eye (paintball gun).
  • Polly removes her mask due to contact lens issues.
• Initial Question: Sufficiency of Claim
  • Need to demonstrate intention or negligence.
• Fowler v Lanning: Cause of action for battery insufficient without allegation of intention.

Trespass to the Person Torts

• Three types: Battery, Assault, and False Imprisonment.
  • Ancient torts.
• Focus shifted from directness to intentional or negligent interferences.

Intentional Interference: The Tort of Battery

• Intention must be shown.
  • Need to be precisely understood.
• Do you need to be angry for battery? No.
  • Even even then, it may still be considered a battery.
• Forde v Skinner: Cutting someone's hair without anger can still constitute battery.

Sitting behind Trespass to Person Torts Overview: Trespass to the Person

• Focus on trespass to the person torts: battery, assault, and false imprisonment.
• Trespass to land is covered in separate courses.

Hypothetical Scenario: Mike on the Bus

• Mike flicks Seb on the ear on a crowded bus to get his attention; Seb claims battery.
  • Mike's defense: He had no malice, only wanted to get Seb's attention.
• Legal Question: Is Mike's defense valid?

Analysis of the Hypothetical

• Malice: Lack of malice does not negate battery.
  • Battery requires intention to bring about bodily contact, not necessarily malice.
• Everyday Conduct: The action exceeded accepted everyday conduct.
• Examination Preparation
  • Practice writing out answers to hypothetical questions, drawing from precedents like Thompson v Police and statements from Re F.

Lord Goff's Principle of Necessity

• If there is a genuine fear for personal safety and lives, actions taken to avoid crushing against people may fall under the principle of necessity.
  Relevance of Motivation and Consent
• Motivation can be a contributing factor in determining battery (referencing Thompson v Police).

Motivation and Consent

• Consent, whether express or implied, negates battery.
  * debate on whether consent is a defence or an element of the tort; current stance is the absence of consent is an element.
• S and G Case
  • Addresses lack of true consent in a case regarding time limits for bringing civil actions.
  • The Court of Appeal stated that the absence of consent is an element of the tort.
  • The clock starts running only when the victim understands both that the battery occurred and that she wasn't consenting.
  • Failure to disclose information raises questions about genuine consent; context-specific.
• Torts vs. Crimes
  • tort vs crime example would be where sexual offences have had place and that a civil claim is possible, and the time to which it can be claimed from is very context-specific.
• Defining a Tort
• Duty of Care

More Notes on the Lecture

• Overview Friday, 13 June 2025 2:40 AM
• Trespass To Persons: - Battery, Assault, False Imprisonment
  • All the common law in our lecture has taken place across the last 500 years
    In Trespass, must look through the lens by directness, intention, and negligence with all acts.
    Example
• Spitting on the wild? - If to determine w