Trespass To Person: Assault, Battery and False Imprisonment

TRESPASS TO PERSON
ASSAULT , BATTERY AND FALSE IMPRISONMENT

 The security of the person one of the important
function of law.
 A trespass to the person means a direct or an
intentional interference with a body or liberty
of any person
 The invasion must be direct and foreseeable by
the defendant
 Common element to is that the wrong must be
committed by “direct means”
 Acts of trespass to the person are generally
crimes as well as torts.
 There are three main forms of trespass to a
person, namely, assault, battery and false
imprisonment
ASSUALT
 According to Winfield:
“ An assault is an act of the defendant which
causes in the minds of the plaintiff reasonable
apprehension of the infliction of battery on him
by the defendant.
 Under I.P.C : (Section 351)
Whoever makes any gesture, or any
preparation intending or knowing it to be likely
that such gesture or preparation will cause any
person present to apprehend that he who makes
that gesture or preparation is about to use
criminal force to that person, is said to commit
an assault.
In general we can say for an act to an assault:
 the conduct forbidden by this tort is act which
threatens violence
 preparation or gesture constituting a threat of
force.
 A reasonable apprehension of the use of force.
 Ability or capability of the defendant to carry
out the treat.
Essential for Assault
 For establishment of the liability in case of
assault following two conditions must be
fulfilled:
I. Intention to use of force
II. Capacity to use force
Example: To throw water at a person is an
assault but if comes to the contact of the
person it becomes battery
I. Intention to use of force:
 There was some gesture or preparation which
constituted a force
 More Than Just Words reasonable fear of
application of force must be caused
 Tuberville v. Savage
Capacity to use force
 For act to constitute assault the person who is
being assaulted must have reasonable grounds to
believe that person who is assault has the ability
to apply force
 Stephen v. Myers
 Threats on the telephone may be an assault

provided the claimant has reason to believe that
they may be carried out in the sufficiently near
future to qualify as “immediate” (R. vs. Ireland)
BATTERY
 According to Salmond :
 Battery is the application of force to the person
of another without any lawful justification.
 A battery includes an assault
 It is mainly distinguishable from in an assault
in the fact that physical contact is necessary to
accomplish it.
 Example : the attempt to strike with stick is an
assault, but to strike actually is battery.
 Always cause without consent of the person
who is harmed
 It does not matter whether the force is applied
directly to the human body itself or to anything
coming in contact with it
 Essentials :
 Plaintiff has to prove:
I. Use of force
II. Force must be intentional
III. Without any lawful justification
Use of force
 No battery if there is no contact
 The amount force that is to be applied is
immaterial
 Cole v. Turnner (even to touch a person
without consent is actionable.)
 R v. Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall
(Unwarranted kiss may be battery)
Force must be intentional
 Mere accidental contact to body does not
amount to battery
 Use of force must be intentional and without
lawful justification
 Stanley v. Powell
 To protect freedom bodily harm but also
freedom insult
Without any lawful justification
 Consent that expressed or implied.
 Mere friendly push or staking hand is not
 Battery like all other trespass is actionable per
se i.e. without any proof of damages
False Imprisonment
 According to Winfield
False imprisonment consists in imprisonment of
a total restrain for some period, however,
short, upon the liberty of another without
sufficient justification.
 False imprisonment has been define as ‘the
inflection of bodily restraint which is not
expressly or impliedly anthorised by the law.
 Wrongful Restrain :
 Whoever wrongfully restrains any person in
such a manner as to prevent that person from
proceeding beyond certain circumscribing
limits, is said “wrongfully to confine” that
person.
Essential elements
 Total restraint
1. The period of restrain is irrelevant
2. To compel a man to remain at a particular
place or to go in a particular direction
3. There must be total deprivation of liberty
4. It is not imprisonment when a person is
restricted to go at any particular direction
 Knowledge of the plaintiff:
 Herring v. Boyle it was held that the knowledge
is essential for false imprisonment
 Meering v. Grahame-white Aviation Co. it was
held that the knowledge of imprisonment was
not essential for bringing action.
 Detention must be unlawful
1. Must be without any justification
2. Shall also apply to person who authorises or
directs such arrest
3. Where the plaintiff himself consents to
curtailment not false imprisonment
Lawful Detention
 Robinson Balmain v. New Ferry Co. Ltd.
 Herd v. Weardale, Steel Coal and Coke Co.
Ltd.
Unlawful Detention
 Rudal Shah v. State of Bihar
 Bhim Sing v. State of J. and K
 Kundal Lal v. Dr. Des Raj
Justifications
1. Self- defence
2. Parental or other authority
3. Public authority
4. Judicial authority
Remedies
1. Action for damages
2. Self help
3. Habeas Corpus

Trespass To Person: Assault, Battery and False Imprisonment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Trespass To Person: Assault, Battery and False Imprisonment

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Trespass To Person: Assault, Battery and False Imprisonment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TRESPASS TO PERSON

ASSAULT , BATTERY AND FALSE IMPRISONMENT

 Threats on the telephone may be an assault

You might also like