The Argument Behind The Torts Of Trespass

1830 Words Dec 10th, 2014 8 Pages
The rationale behind the torts of trespass to the person are that they protect the inviolability of personal freedom and the right of self-determination within the confines of the law subject to the necessary demands of the law giving freedom from harassment and false imprisonment.

The area of law in question is trespass to the person and whether the persons mentioned in the scenario have Liability under this trespass for various acts’ they may or may not have committed.

Simon, Mel and the caretaker are victims or not liable for any torts. Consideration will be given for the liability of the persons in this scenario Sharon, Cheryl and the Surgeon who have potentially committed the following torts;

• Assault
• Battery
• Harassment
…show more content…
Individual liability will now be examined

Sharon’s threat to bitch slap Cheryl ‘good and proper’ could amount to an assault as it is a clear and intentional threat of a battery to Sharon. Costanza held that threats and words can amount to an assault without the need for menacing movements to be the sole cause of harm. Sharon’s statement were it not for the presence of other staff would be sufficient to avoid liability Turberville, she does not have the intent to carry out the threat immediately which negates potential liability for battery as in Thomas

Battery The definition of battery is ‘an act of the defendant that directly causes and intentionally or negligently causes some physical contact with the person of the claimant without lawful consent’ traditionally an act whether committed intentionally or negligently could amount to trespass. In Letang it was held that an act of the defendant must be committed intentionally to be considered trespass to the person.

The requisite intention for battery is that the defendant intends to touch the claimant whether or not he intends to cause injury. In Collins Goff LJ states that the principle is that ‘every person’s body is inviolate’ this runs counter to Cole where lord Holt states that the least touching in anger is a battery, thus prior to Collins there had to be

More about The Argument Behind The Torts Of Trespass

Open Document