The defendant appealed his conviction for assault. He had suspected a lodger of theft, and was accused of having assaulted him while interrogating him about it. He locked the complainant in his room, but he then fell whilst escaping through a first floor window. The prosecution was on the basis that the terror induced itself was an assault occasioning actual bodily harm.
Held: ‘[In] the phrase ‘actual bodily harm’ . . [are] three words of the English language which receive no elaboration and in the ordinary course should not receive any. The word ‘harm’ is a synonym for injury. The word ‘actual’ indicates that the injury (although there is no need for it to be permanent) should not be so trivial as to be wholly insignificant. The purpose of the definition in section 47 is to define an element of aggravation in the assault. It must be an assault which besides being an assault (or assault and battery) causes to the victim some injury’. Accordingly the phrase ‘actual bodily harm’ is capable of include psychiatric injury. But it does not include mere emotions such as fear or distress nor panic nor does it include, as such, states of mind that are not themselves evidence of some identifiable clinical condition. The phrase ‘state of mind’ is not a scientific one and should be avoided in considering whether or not a psychiatric injury has been caused; its use is likely to create in the minds of the Jury the impression that something which is no more than a strong emotion, such as extreme fear or panic, can amount to actual bodily harm. It cannot.
Citations:
[1993] EWCA Crim 1, [1994] 1 WLR 689, [1994] 2 All ER 552
Links:
Statutes:
Offences Against the Person Act 1861 46
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Ashman 1858
The defendant was charged with shooting with intent. The judge directed the jury: ‘You must be satisfied that the prisoner had an intent to do grievous bodily harm. It is not necessary that such harm should have been actually done, or that it should . .
Cited – Attia v British Gas CA 26-Jun-1987
The defendant set the plaintiff’s house on fire when installing central heating. She claimed damages for the shock she suffered on hearing of the fire.
Held: The plaintiff could recover damages for psychiatric injury she suffered when the . .
Cited – Regina v Miller Assz 1954
A husband was charged with rape of his wife after she had left him and petitioned for divorce. He was also charged with an assault.
Held: There was no evidence which entitled the court to say that the wife’s implied consent to marital . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Smith HL 1960
The defendant tried to avoid arrest and killed a policeman by driving off with the policeman clinging to the car.
Held: (1) The defendant committed murder because death or grievous bodily harm was foreseen by him as a ‘likely’ result of his . .
Cited – McLoughlin v O’Brian HL 6-May-1982
The plaintiff was the mother of a child who died in an horrific accident, in which her husband and two other children were also injured. She was at home at the time of the accident, but went to the hospital immediately when she had heard what had . .
Cited – Regina v Metharam CCA 1961
The court applied a subjective test when asking whether the defendant intended the harm caused. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime
Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.245679