Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key


Play button


Play button




Click to flip

25 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back

non fatal offences



-s47 OAPA - assault occasioning ABH

-s20 OAPA - maliciously wounding or causing GBH

-s18 OAPA - wounding or causing GBH with intent



apprehension of force

communication of the threat


MENS REA - intentionally or recklessly

apprehension of force

Logdon v DPP - you dont need an intent to carry out a threat - even if you dont intend to ever imply force still can be liable

R v Ireland - silence can equal apprehension of force

R v Constanza - 800 letters and phone calls ec - words alone can equal an assault

communication of threat

Tuberville v Savage - words can sometimes negate an assault

R v Ireland - silence can communicate a threat


Smith v Super intendant of woking police station - immediate does not mean instantaneously

Constanza - fear soon not excluding the immediate future

Ireland same as above

MR - intention/reckless

Venna - if D thinks that V may have apprehension talked about in AR

Spratt - recklessness means that D must have had some idea of the risk

Parmenter and Savage - D doesnt need MR in terms of the harm that was inflicted merely foreseeability that some harm may come about




-everyday touching





Thomas - any unlawful touching is a battery

Kingston and Clarence - sex whilst knowingly having STI

Fagan v MPC - driving onto foot and not getting off equals battery

DPP v K - does not have to be direct (hairdryer)

DPP v Santana bermudez - can be committed by an omission eg omission to tell PO about needle in pocket

Everyday touching

Collins v Wilcock - PO took hold of womens arm which equalled a battery

KD v CC of Hampshire - touching not consensual


Brown - unless in public interest if consent given it does not count

MR - same as assault

Venna - needs to foresee V may have apprehension as AR

Spratt - reckless must have some idea of the risk

Paramenter - D doesnt need MR for harm inflicted merely that some harm will come about

CPS charging standards on battery



-black eyes

CPS charging standards on ABH

-broken teeth/jaw

-multiple/extensive bruising

-temporary loss of sensory function

-minor fractures

CPS charging standards on GBH

-extensive treatment

-sufficient visible disfigurement

-broken limbs/skull

-permanent disaility/loss of sensory function

s47 OAPA

Assault occassioning ABH

AR - assault/battery




Paramenter + MR for assault/battery


Roberts - jumped from car - this was seen as reasonable reaction


Ireland - silent phone calls caused the psychiatric injury

Roberts - his assault caused the ABH


Miller - any hurt or injury which interferes with health or comfort

Chan Fook - not so trivial which means that it is wholly irrelevant


only need MR for assault/battery. No need for intent or even foresee ABHs

s20 OAPA

maliciously wounding/causing GBH

AR - wound


MR - intent or reckless


has to cut through two layers of the skin. in exam - cut or laceration



clarence - sti therefore inflicting through sex. consent to sex does not equal consent to sti

wilson - branding skin is infliction

dica - same as clarence


malicious = intent or recklnessness

Mowatt - if D clearly intended harm then intent satisfied

Cunningham - reckless = foreseen harm but done it anyway!

s18 OAPA

wounding or GBH with intent

AR -same as s20

MR - intent to GBH


Belfon - must prove there was intent for GBH

Morrison - malice must be shown if intent to resist arrest is relied on