Docsity
Log inSign up
Docsity
Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity

Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan

Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips
Sell on Docsity
Sell on Docsity
Log inSign up

Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity

Find documents

Prepare for your exams with the study notes shared by other students like you on Docsity

Search Store documents

The best documents sold by students who completed their studies

Search through all study resources
Docsity AINEW

Summarize your documents, ask them questions, convert them into quizzes and concept maps

Explore questions

Clear up your doubts by reading the answers to questions asked by your fellow students

Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan

Share documents
download point icon20 Points

For each uploaded document

Answer questions
download point icon5 Points

For each given answer (max 1 per day)

All the ways to get free points
Get points immediately

Choose a premium plan with all the points you need

Study Opportunities

Choose your next study program

Get in touch with the best universities in the world. Search through thousands of universities and official partners

Community

Ask the community

Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts

University Rankings

Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users

Free resources

Our save-the-student-ebooks!

Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors

From our blog

Exams and Study
Go to the blog

Assignment on trespass to the person dealing with battery, assault and false imprisonment, Assignments of Law of Torts

University of Central Lancashire (UCLan)Law of Torts
Prof. Darran Chapple

Assignment for trespass to the person. Marked 74/100

Typology: Assignments

2020/2021

Uploaded on 01/08/2022

p-ramsohye
p-ramsohye 🇬🇧

1 document

1 / 7

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
School of Justice Coursework Cover Sheet
Assessment Title
Students should add this coversheet, to the start of their assessment before submission through Turnitin.
Seminar Tutor (If appropriate): Dr Richard Saffrey-Mayger / Martine Marie Gontier
Module Title: Tort Law Programme Title: Graduate Diploma in Law
Module Code: LA3091 Year of Study: 2021
Academic Misconduct / Plagiarism Declaration
By attaching this front cover sheet to my assessment I confirm and declare that I am the sole author of this
work, except where otherwise acknowledged by appropriate referencing and citation, and that I have taken
all reasonable skill and care to ensure that no other person has been able, or allowed, to copy this work in
either paper or electronic form, and that prior to submission I have read, understood and followed the
University regulations as outlined in the Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure for Academic Misconduct
available at the following link: https://www.uclan.ac.uk/study_here/assets/assessment_handbook_2122.pdf
Have you checked the following in order to maximise the grade you can
achieve for this assignment?
Please mark X to
confirm
Learning Outcomes have been addressed x
Similarity check via Turn-it-in x
Referencing accuracy according to provided guide x
Grammar x
Spelling x
Word count (or other length limitation as described in the brief) x
WELLBEING
We wish to support any student who is
experiencing mitigating circumstances which
prevents students from performing to the best of
their ability when completing or submitting
assignments. If you are experiencing such
circumstances, then you may apply for mitigating
circumstances. Wherever possible this must be
done prior to handing your assignment.
I believe that I do / I do not need to apply for
mitigating circumstances for this assignment at
this moment in time
Please delete as appropriate
(You may still apply for mitigating circumstances
if you subsequently feel that your performance
has been adversely affected by issues that you
may currently be unaware of).
pf3
pf4
pf5

Partial preview of the text

Download Assignment on trespass to the person dealing with battery, assault and false imprisonment and more Assignments Law of Torts in PDF only on Docsity!

School of Justice Coursework Cover Sheet

Assessment Title

Students should add this coversheet, to the start of their assessment before submission through Turnitin. Seminar Tutor (If appropriate): Dr Richard Saffrey-Mayger / Martine Marie Gontier Module Title: Tort Law Programme Title: Graduate Diploma in Law Module Code: LA3091 Year of Study: 2021 Academic Misconduct / Plagiarism Declaration By attaching this front cover sheet to my assessment I confirm and declare that I am the sole author of this work, except where otherwise acknowledged by appropriate referencing and citation, and that I have taken all reasonable skill and care to ensure that no other person has been able, or allowed, to copy this work in either paper or electronic form, and that prior to submission I have read, understood and followed the University regulations as outlined in the Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure for Academic Misconduct available at the following link: https://www.uclan.ac.uk/study_here/assets/assessment_handbook_2122.pdf Have you checked the following in order to maximise the grade you can achieve for this assignment? Please mark X to confirm Learning Outcomes have been addressed (^) x Similarity check via Turn-it-in (^) x Referencing accuracy according to provided guide (^) x Grammar (^) x Spelling (^) x Word count (or other length limitation as described in the brief) (^) x WELLBEING We wish to support any student who is experiencing mitigating circumstances which prevents students from performing to the best of their ability when completing or submitting assignments. If you are experiencing such circumstances, then you may apply for mitigating circumstances. Wherever possible this must be done prior to handing your assignment. I believe that I do / I do not need to apply for mitigating circumstances for this assignment at this moment in time Please delete as appropriate (You may still apply for mitigating circumstances if you subsequently feel that your performance has been adversely affected by issues that you may currently be unaware of).

SELF – REFLECTION This section suggested for inclusion if appropriate to the assessment otherwise can be deleted It is optional for you to complete the self-reflection section, but you are encouraged to consider the benefits to your personal and academic development. Follow this library link to access an example of the academic literature that will help you explore and understand these benefits , (Jennifer A. Moon, 2013. Reflection in Learning and Professional Development: Theory and Practice) https://librarysearch.uclan.ac.uk/permalink/44UOCL_INST/1jklcnf/ cdi_askewsholts_vlebooks_ If you complete this section, we will ensure that your feedback/forward addresses the specific areas of academic practice for which you seek support or guidance. Self-reflection guidance:

  1. Review the assessment criteria in the assignment brief.
  2. List the criteria below – you can use all the criteria or choose those which you wish to focus on.
  3. Next to the criteria you have listed indicate the degree to which you think you have met that criteria using the phrases “Not Met”, “Partially Met”, “Completely Met”
  4. In the third column provide a brief comment that indicates your reason for your self-assessment and what would help you improve Criteria Self-Assessment Rationale & Further Support Example: Referencing Partially Met I am confident referencing journals and books, but I am unsure how to reference web pages, podcasts and legislation. An additional tutorial on less common referencing would help. Understanding Completely Met I am confident that I have properly read the coursework material and understood the assignment. Applying Completely Met I am confident that I have applied the legal knowledge acquired during the course of my lectures and from seminar to the problem question. Research Partially met I am confident in my own research.

battery. While it can be argued that Aaron could possibly construe Zak was approaching him with the intention to commit battery, Zak actually had no intention to cause harm to Aaron because instead, he wanted to block Aaron from interring with Sophie. In addition, there is no further suggestion that Zak would follow through with a physical force. In defense against the claim of assault, Zak could argue that he sensed the menace following the threat made by Aaron and he approached the latter to deescalate the situation. In addition, it is probable that Aaron has also committed a battery by hitting Zak. In Collins [1984]^5 A battery is defined as the intentional application of direct and immediate unlawful physical contact to someone else. The application of force must be intentional and according to such application must be unlawful but does not need to be hostile. The case of Scott^6 further established that there must be direct and immediate use of force on the other person. Therefore, the preconditions required to establish that the physical contact is a battery are intention, application of unlawful, direct and immediate physical force. In relation to Aaron punching Zak in the face, it would appear that he has committed a battery because the act per se, was hostile and intended to inflict a physical harm upon Zak. It does do not matter to what degree Zak has suffered injuries, as battery requires only that the act itself to be intentional. Conversely, it can be argued that upon seeing Zak approaching Aaron with his arms wide open, the latter has reacted and responded entirely out of self-defense. However, in Ashley^7 [1773], when acting in self- defense an individual must honestly believe that the force applied was necessary and that the use of such force was reasonable. According to Cockcroft [1705]^8 , the actions the defendant took in self-defence was proportionate to the perceived threat. Therefore, even if Aaron had perceived a threat, a blow to Zak’s face was out of proportion and not reasonable. The defense is likely to fail, (^5) Ibid, Collins v Wilcok [1984] 1 WLR 1172 (^6) Scott v Shephard [1773] 2 Black W 892, 96 ER 525 (^7) Ashley v Chief Constable of West Sussex Police [2008] UKHL 25 (^8) Cockcroft v Smith [1705] 11 Mod Rep 43

because Aaron had already committed an assault in the first instance and he followed through by immediate battery. In this case, it is likely Aaron would still be facing charges for battery. The act of pinning Aaron to the ground can be construed as a battery as the act per se satisfies all the element of battery, including, intention, application of unlawful, direct and immediate force upon Aaron. Furthermore, Sophie and Zak might have also committed an act of false imprisonment by constraining Aaron to the ground until arrival of law enforcement. In Collins [1984]^9 , false imprisonment is defined as the unlawful imposition of constraints on someone else’s freedom of movement^10. The first element of false imprisonment can be analysed in Bird [1845]^11 , in which it was found that a complete restriction of the claimant’s freedom of movement was a requisite for the tort to be satisfied. Moreover, as observed in Brockhill [2001]^12 , the defendant must also intend or by acting recklessly to cause the restrain. The third element explains that the restriction of freedom needs to be unlawful^13. Therefore, this substantiates that the use of restrain on Aaron could be interpreted as false imprisonment since the latter was subjected to intentional restriction of his movements and that such restrain was not lawfully authorized. However, as emphasized in Ashley [2007]^14 , the person must honestly believe that the use of force was required and reasonable. The use of force and restrained applied here could be seen as a proportionate in response to Aaron’s aggression. Sophie and Zak would likely be able to prove that they honestly believed that the force was necessary to neutralize Aaron and that they had acted reasonably in response of his hostility. Therefore, a claim on trespass to the person is not likely to succeed here. (^9) Collins v Wilcok [1984] 1 WLR 1172 (^10) Ibid, Collins v Wilcok [1984] 1 WLR 1172, page 1177 (Goff LJ) (^11) Bird v Jones [1845] | 115 E.R. 668 (^12) R v Governor of Brockhill Prison, ex p Evans (No.2) [2001] 2 AC 19 (^13) Article 5 European Convention on Human Rights right to liberty and security where the defendant is a public authority (^14) Ashley v Chief Constable of West Sussex Police [2008] UKHL 25

Word count: 1500 Bibliography Primary sources Cases: Collins v Wilcok [1984] 1 WLR 1172 Read v Coker [1853] 13 CB 850 Thomas v National Union of Miners (South Wales Area) [1986] 1 Ch 20 R v Constanza [1997] Crim LR 576 Scott v Shephard [1773] 2 Black W 892, 96 ER 525 Ashley v Chief Constable of West Sussex Police [2008] UKHL 25 Cockcroft v Smith [1705] 11 Mod Rep 43 Bird v Jones [1845] | 115 E.R. 668 R v Governor of Brockhill Prison, ex p Evans (No.2) [2001] 2 AC 19 Ashley v Chief Constable of West Sussex Police [2008] UKHL 25 Meering v Graham-White Aviation Co Ltd [1920] 122 LT 44 EU Legislation: European Convention on Human Rights, Article 5 Secondary Sources Books: Kirsty Horsey and Erika Rackley, Tort Law (6th^ edition, Oxford University Press, 2019) Websites: < https://legal.thomsonreuters.com/en/westlaw> accessed on 21 – 26 November 2021 < https://www.findlaw.com/injury/torts-and-personal-injuries/false-imprisonment.html> accessed on 24 November 2021