Assault and Battery Under Torts| Notes on Law of Torts

Introduction

Assault and Battery are two forms of Trespass to person. Battery is the intentional application of force to another person. Assault is an action of the defendant which causes to the plaintiff a reasonable apprehension of the infliction of a battery on him by the defendant. (Winfield)

To throw water at a person is assault. It is battery if a drop falls on him. Pulling away the chair when a person is about to sit is assault. It becomes battery when he touches the ground. Similarly, flashing light with a mirror is assault. It is battery when the rays impinge on the plaintiff.

The word force has a defined scope in the context of assault and battery ; infliction of light, heat, electricity, gas, odour and similar things which may be applied to such a degree as to cause injury or personal discomfort, amounts to force as required in battery. As Chief justice Holt, rightly said the least touching of another in anger is battery (Cole V. Turner). Hence spitting a man on his face is assault, but, if any drops fall on him, it is battery.

Pointing a loaded pistol is assault. Pointing an unloaded pistol is no assault. In V. St. George, it was held that pointing an unloaded pistol at dangerously close quarters was assault. There was a reasonable apprehension of the impact of the gun. Hence it was assault.

In Stephens V. Myers : P as Chairman, was in a meeting. D, a member became angry and vociferous. Resolution was passed to remove him from the meeting. Thereupon D moved with closed first towards the Chairman, but was stopped by a person who was sitting next to D. Held that there was assault. When a person standing on a Railway platform shows his fist to the plaintiff who is in moving train, there is no assault.

Awakening a pupil in a class-room by another student while the class is going on, is battery. But if the teacher wakes him up there is no battery.

Similarly in the case of sermons, to touch a person with the least force, to call attention, is no battery, if this is done by the Bishop.

There are hundreds of instances of assault and battery in the day to day affairs of human beings. But because of the good humour of mankind they do not go to the Courts. Perhaps the other reason is De minimis non-curet lex meaning law does not take cognisance of trifles.

What is Assault Tort?

Assault in tort law refers to an act that creates a reasonable apprehension in the mind of another person of imminent harmful or offensive contact. In other words, it is the threat of harm, where the plaintiff has a legitimate reason to believe that they are about to be physically harmed. Importantly, physical contact is not necessary for an assault claim to be valid; the focus is on the fear or apprehension of harm.

Key Elements of Assault:

1. Intent: The defendant must have the intent to cause apprehension of harm or offensive contact.
2. Apprehension: The plaintiff must be aware of the threat and have a reasonable belief that the harm is imminent.
3. No Need for Physical Contact: The act of assault does not require physical contact; the apprehension alone suffices.

Example:

If someone raises a fist and threatens to punch another person, causing the other person to fear imminent harm, it constitutes an assault, even if the punch is never thrown.

What is Battery Tort?

Battery in tort law occurs when there is intentional, harmful, or offensive contact with another person without their consent. Unlike assault, battery tort requires physical contact between the defendant and the plaintiff. The contact can be direct, such as hitting, or indirect, such as causing harm through an object. The key element is that the contact must be unwanted and either harmful or offensive.

Key Elements of Battery:

1. Intent: The defendant must have intended to make contact with the plaintiff.
2. Contact: Actual physical contact must occur between the defendant and the plaintiff’s body or something closely associated with the plaintiff.
3. Harmful or Offensive: The contact must be harmful or offensive in nature, and it must occur without the plaintiff’s consent.

Example:

Slapping someone during an argument would constitute battery, as it involves direct, intentional, and harmful physical contact.

Difference Between Assault and Battery in Tort Law

Although assault and battery often occur together, they are distinct torts with different elements. The difference between assault and battery lies primarily in the presence of physical contact.

• Assault: The focus is on creating an apprehension of imminent harm or offensive contact. No actual contact is required.
• Battery: Involves actual physical contact that is harmful or offensive and occurs without consent.

For example, raising a fist in a threatening manner constitutes assault, while actually punching someone constitutes battery.

---

Assault and Battery in Tort Law: Legal Implications

Both assault and battery are classified as intentional torts under the law of torts, meaning the defendant must have intended the harmful act. Legal liability for these torts is determined by the court based on the intent, the act, and the consequences.

Legal Consequences:

• Compensatory Damages: Victims of assault and battery can recover compensatory damages, which may include medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering.
• Punitive Damages: In some cases, the court may award punitive damages to punish the defendant for egregious conduct.

Defences to Assault and Battery under Law of Torts

For assault and Battery the following are the defences open to the defendant.

1. Self Defence : This is a natural right recognised by law. A person may defend his person, his family or his property from any trespass. Of course, the physical defence must be proportionate to the injury received. Similarly, a person may inflict injury to defend his property.
2. Right to Expulsion : The defendant is entitled to forcibly expel the trespasser who enters by force or otherwise without permission. Of course, the defendant should not use more force than what is necessary.
3. Right to retake property : Use of force as is ‘necessary’ under the circumstances is valid and law allows the retaining of the land or goods using force
4. Volenti non fit injuria : In lawful games like cricket, football, boxing etc.. any injury received is covered under volenti non fit injuria. This is a good defence to the defendant.
5. Legal Arrest or search : Under the law the police officer is empowered to arrest a person or search a premises and in such a circumstance, he may use so much of the force as is necessary according to law.
6. Force used under authority : Parents, guardians, supervisors of trainees, captain of ship etc. have some inherent rights to “correct” the persons under their control. Such persons may validly defend themselves, provided the force used was reasonable and necessary.