Battery and Assault PDF

Preview

Summary

Battery and Assault Torts: Flow chart...

Description

BATTERY

Direct and intentional (includes reckless and negligent) conduct that cause contact with the body of another without consent

Direct (not consequential interference) Scott v Sheppard

Offensive contact – any degree of touching without consent Collins v Wilcock

Exception for all physical contact which is generally acceptable in the ordinary conduct of daily life Rixon v Star City Marion’s Case

Elements for BATTERY

Fault: Intentional (reckless or negligent) conduct Stanley v Powell

Defendant to prove lack of fault McHale v Watson Act that causes the contact must be a positive and voluntary act Innes v Wylie Hogan v Gill

No need for hostility or anger Rixon v Star City

ASSAULT

Threat that causes the Plaintiff to apprehend imminent harmful or offensive contact (ie to apprehend an imminent battery)

Direct (not consequential interference) Scott v Sheppard

Apprehension of imminent contact enough (do not need to fear).

Fault: Intentional (reckless or negligent) conduct Stanley v Powell

Elements for ASSAULT

Conditional threat may amount to an assault Rosza v Samuels

Imminent contact can include a continuing threat Zanker v Vartzokas

Police v Greaves

Threat generally consists of words with gesture. Can also be gesture alone, or words alone in certain circumstances.

Focus of threat is on reasonable belief of the Plt

Barton v Armstron; Slaveski v Victoria

Zanker v Vartokas Hall v Foncea

No need for Def to intend to carry out the threat (just intend the conduct) McClelland v Symons

Zanker v Vartzokas...