Defences - Trespass to the person PDF

Preview

Summary

Notes which I did on my own for revision purposes. I got a First Class degree ...

Description

Defences 1. Self-Defence Ashley v Chief Constable of West Sussex Police [2008] Cockcroft v Smith [1705]

Lane v Holloway [1968]

Cross v Kirby [2000] Provocation is not a valid defence to trespass. 2. Necessity F v West Berkshire Health Authority [1990]

Armed police raid, Ashley was shot dead. The police admitted liability in negligence and false imprisonment, but resisted the assault and battery claim on the ground that the police officer had acted in selfdefence in the mistaken belief that the deceased was armed and about to shoot. D must have an honest and reasonable belief. Argument between lawyer and a clerk in court. Clerk pointed his fingers towards the lawyer’s eyes and the lawyer bit off the finger. This was not a reasonable response to the clerk’s threat. It was established that the idea of self-defence must be in proportion. Pair of neighbours not in good relation. One came home drunk one night, being asked to remain quiet, he replied the lady (D’s wife) by abusing her. Drunk guy gave him a friendly shove, the husband then struck the claimant in the eye. C appealed on reduction of damages. Force must be reasonable and proportionate to the harm threatened. D (farmer) allowed his land to be used by the hunt. C was a hunt saboteur. D had forcibly removed the claimant’s girlfriend from the land C attacked the D with baseball bat. D wrested the bat from him and hit him on his head causing fracture. Claim for assault and battery failed because the D was acting in self-defence.

Doctors sought permission to sterilize a 36-yr old woman with mental age of five who had become sexually active. Because of her condition she was incapable of giving informed consent. Operation be lawful if doctor considered it to be the best interests of the patient. Otherwise, the principle still stood that adult competent patients must consent, or it is considered battery. To provide a legal framework for acting and making decisions on behalf Mental Capacity of adults who lack the capacity to make particular decisions for Act 2005 themselves. 3. Consent – Negates a battery, false imprisonment and assault. Chatterton v During an operation, the patient got an injection rendering her leg Gerson [1981] – numb. Claimed, not fully made aware of the potential consequences of Valid consent the injection. Held: C’s consent was valid because she had consented to the broad nature of the procedure. Patient pregnant, involved in car accident. During hospital treatment, Re T (Adult: she required bold transfusion. Influenced by her mother (Jehovah’s Refusal of Treatment) [1993] witness), the patient refused blood transfusion. – Refusing consent If the patient had the requisite capacity, they are bound by his decision. If not, they are free to treat him in what they believe to be his best interest. Re MB

23yr old, pregnant, doctors recommended the delivery be by Caesarean

(Caesarean Section) [1997] – The limits of refusal.

Mental Capacity Act 2005 – S.1

Section. Vaginal delivery could result into death of child or brain damage. Frightened of needles she refused. Court sought and obtained order to a Caesarean Section after the appellant went into labour. Best interests were not limited to medical best interests, and it was clear that the appellant was more likely to suffer significant long-term damage if the baby died or was born handicapped. Now provides statutory defence to trespass torts - if complainant did not possess mental capacity to consent. S.1 (4) A person is not to be treated as unable to make a decision merely because he makes an unwise decision. (5) An act done, or decision made, under this Act for or on behalf of a person who lacks capacity must be done, or made, in his best interests....