ABH

• • define: ABH is defined in s47 of the offences agaisnt a person act as assault occasioning bodily harm
• to commit the actus reus there has to be common assault that causes injury
• explain actus reus - assault.

  assault is causing someone to apprehend immediate force . v must apprehend force, believe force will be used, apprehension is subjective to v( dpp v logdon). v must believe force will be applied immediately which is taken to mean in the near future (smith v cc woking). v fear must arise from d threats/ thretaneing behaviour. threats can be made verbally/ silence(ireland), writing (constanza), actions(read v coker)
• explain actus reus- battery

  battery is the ppliaction of unlawful force. d must apply force- sligtest touch consititues (r v thomas). appliaction of force must be unlawful. unlawful= hostile= unwanted/ aggressive ( wilson v pringle). not hostile if everyday jostlings or implied consent. force can be applied indirectly (dpp v k), or continuously (fagan)
• apply assualt

  identify type of threat.how v apprehends force. can be applied in future? proximaty?, location, same room, d sees v, dee can hear v?
• apply battery

  slightest touch occured? what point?. touch aggressive/ unwanted?. how has force been applied ?. slightest touch occured? what point?
• • explain abh
then prove v suffered actual harm. abh taken to mean ordinary meaning of actual harm but don't include injuries that are so trivial to be considered wholly insignificant(chanfook). can be in the form of loss of consciousness (t v dpp), cutting hair (smith), psychological injuries ( chan-fook)
• • apply abh
state injury why injury beyond minimial? why?
• • prove assault/battery caused the eventual injury fc proven using bft (pagett)lc proven using the o&s test prove d significant (smith)coc must be established between ds B/A and the injurycoc can b broken by IA that must be unreasonable or unforeseeable- williams, roberts, pagett, jordan, acts of god vulnerabilities don't break coc (blaue)
• apply causation

  bftl anything classed as IA?was reasonable and forseeable?why?
• expalin mens rea of ABH

  prove d had mens rea. mens rea of s47 abh is the mens rea of the initial B/A. d doesn't need to intend or see risk of harm (savage). d can have direct intention where he aim to bring about the consequence (mohan). or be reckless and realise a risk of harm and carry on regardless (cunningham)
• • apply mens rea of abh



  did d want to hurt v- motive?
• PLAN FOR ABH

  1. identify and define offence- s47 oaapa as aobh
  2. explain actus reus of the common assault- A= ddp v logdon, smith v cc woking, ireland, constaza, read v coker B= r v thomas, wilson v pringle, dpp v k, fagan