- Published on
KembaraXtra-Case Law-Collins v Wilcock (1984)
Case Summary:
Case Summary:
- The defendant (D) refused to speak with the plaintiff (P), a policewoman. P took hold of D's arm to restrain her, and D scratched P's arm in response.
- Held: D was not guilty of assaulting a police officer in the execution of their duty.
- Assault vs. Battery:
- Assault: An act that causes another person to apprehend the infliction of immediate, unlawful force. (Focus on apprehension of contact).
- Battery: The actual infliction of unlawful force on another person. (Any touching, however slight, can constitute battery).
- Consent as a Defence:
- Consent is a valid defence to battery.
- Many physical contacts in ordinary life are not actionable because they are impliedly consented to by those who participate in society and expose themselves to the risk of contact.
- "Everyday Jostling" Exception:
- "Everyday jostling" (physical contact generally acceptable in daily life) falls within a general exception to battery.
- Nature of Holding (2) - Consent: Is the statement about implied consent a legal finding (de jure) or simply an observation about how cases are typically prosecuted (de facto)? Is it both?
0 Comments