53. I would answer the question posed by the Magistrates in the affirmative. None. 51. The court of appeal said, obiter, "there could be no dispute that if you touch a persons clothes whilst he is wearing them that is equivalent to touching him", The defendant placed an iron bar across the doorway of a theatre, he then switched of the lights, in the panic which followed several of the audience were injured when they were trapped and unable to open the door. Scan this QR code to download the app now. Indeed I have not put in the words deliberately or recklessly. However the children's act 2004 now means that a battery committed in a child is not lawful is it results in any injury. LORD JUSTICE LAWS: Then you put in the alternative as well, "or whether the actus reus is satisfied in circumstances where the unlawful force is transmitted through a medium". LORD JUSTICE LAWS: It would say: "Whether the actus reus of the offence of battery requires that there be direct physical contact between defendant and complainant (whether by the body or by a medium controlled by the defendant such as a weapon).". An issue in the case was whether grievous bodily harm might be inflicted without an assault being committed. LORD JUSTICE LAWS: I think that is right. That would be a large hill to climb, although he rightly pointed out that no counsel appeared on either side of the case. crime - British and Irish Legal Information Institute The defendant had consumed large quantities of alcohol and drugs and then attacked people in a public house and also the police officers who tried to arrest him. Martin was convicted of an offence under s20 offences against a person act 1862. Ian Yule. Mr King, do you have any attitude to this application? . In a panic he poured the acid, or what remained of it, into the upturned nozzle of the drying machine that was there in the lavatory, and he went back to the class. BAILII - England and Wales Cases page 123 The defendant had hit a mother in the face as she held the child. [10], 1898unknown: Capt. WebHaystead v Chief Constable Of Derbyshire (2000) High Court Queen's Bench Division. Since the introduction of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 the Derbyshire Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) is now responsible for tasks that were once completed by the Police Authority. In November 2012, Alan Charles was elected as PCC for a four-year term. A battery could be inflicted even though the force actually used was used only indirectly. 86. Mr Head relies, in particular, on a passage from the speech of Lord Steyn at page 161E to G. Lord Steyn said: 20. LORD JUSTICE LAWS: Speaking for myself, I think you would be better of using the word "force" because "violence" might just be thought to beg some questions. LORD JUSTICE LAWS: We will certify in those terms, but refuse leave. Found Haystead v Chief Constable of Derbyshire useful? WebHaystead v DPP [2000] 3 All ER 690. LORD JUSTICE LAWS: Foreseeability has nothing to do with the actus reus it only has to do with the mens rea, so it should not be there. 43. The defendant said that in battery it was necessary to have directed the assault against the child directly since the wording of the offence was an act by which a person intentionally or recklessly applies unlawful force to the complainant., The appeal was dismissed since battery can be applied through a medium of a weapon and given that the mothers dropping the baby was akin to that. A man punched a woman twice in the face while she was holding her child in her arms. What is critical to Mr Head's case is the emphasis placed on the "direct application of force". In-house law team. The cases linked on your profile facilitate Casemine's artificial intelligence engine in recommending you to potential clients who might be interested in availing your services for similar matters.