Intentional Injuries To The Person

Question 1

Dodwell v Burford

Answer 1

Defendant hit the claimant’s horse, the claimant was thrown off, held that direct force doesn’t need to be applied to the claimant.

Question 2

Tuberville v Savage

Answer 2

No imminent danger “if it were not assize time I would not take such language from you”

Question 3

Thomas v National Union of Mineworkers

Answer 3

Working miners were not at danger of being imminently subjected to force, police were present.

Question 4

Mbasogo v Logo

Answer 4

Head of state of Equitorial Guinea tried to sue mercenaries who tried to overthrow him, court held that there was no grounds for him to think he was in danger as the mercenaries did not get close to him.

Question 5

Bird v Jones

Answer 5

Right of way through someone’s land was fenced off, B claimed he had been falsely imprisoned, failed as he could leave the area and walk around the fence.

Question 6

Iqbal v Prison Officer’s Association

Answer 6

Prisoners claimed false imprisonment, but it failed as they were being rightfully imprisoned.

Question 7

Meering v Grahame-White Aviation

Answer 7

No requirement that the claimant is aware of their imprisonment, even if they are asleep, drunk or a lunatic.

Question 8

Wilkinson v Downton

Answer 8

C suffered nervous shock as D told her falsely that her husband had been seriously injured, held that there was sufficient intention.

Question 9

OPO v MLA

Answer 9

James Rhodes case, Wilkinson v Downton was applied and it was held that nervous shock may occur as a result of JR’s direct intention. Extended the ambit of the case.

Question 10

Rhodes v OPO

Answer 10

Three key elements necessary for tort of intentionally causing psychological harm: (1) conduct element, (2) mental element and (3) imputation of intention by operation of a rule of law has no proper place in the law of tort.

Question 11

R v Williams

Answer 11

Case with singing teacher telling pupil that sex was a procedure to help singing, deceit vitiated consent.

Question 12

R v Tabassum

Answer 12

Defendant claimed breast exams were for scientific research, consent was vitiated.

Question 13

KV v Chief Constable of Hampshire

Answer 13

Consent can be withdrawn. Police officer hugged distressed woman, there was initially consent, but this was withdrawn as the behaviour became more sexual.

Question 14

R v Dica

Answer 14

An apparently valid consent will be vitiated if it was produced through illegitimate pressure or illegitimate exercise of influence over the person.

Question 15

Chatterton v Gerson

Answer 15

Patient consented to operation, but did not consent to the operation being conducted in the way in which it was.

Question 16

Herd v Weardale Steel, Cole and Coke

Answer 16

Once man had descended into mine he decided that he did not want to continue, claim for false imprisonment failed because it would have taken them so long to take him back up to the surface.

Question 17

Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech AHA

Answer 17

Oral contraceptives could be prescribed to under 16s without parental consent

Question 18

Re F

Answer 18

Court authorised sterilisation of mental patient. Held that interference may be made where its in the best interests of the patient, it is necessary and a reasonable person would take the same decision.

Question 19

Scott v Shepherd

Answer 19

Force was proven by the defendant throwing firework at claimant.