- Published on
IkembaraXtra-Case Law- Ireland; Burstow (1997) HL: Study Guide
Case Summary:
Case Summary:
- The House of Lords case Ireland; Burstow (1997) HL, consolidated two appeals concerning the interpretation of "bodily harm" under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 (OAPA 1861).
- Ireland: Made repeated silent phone calls and heavy breathing to three victims, causing psychiatric illness. Convicted under s.47 OAPA 1861.
- Burstow: Stalked victim for eight months, causing severe depression. Convicted under s.20 OAPA 1861.
- Both defendants appealed, arguing that psychiatric illness does not constitute "bodily harm" under sections 20 and 47 of the OAPA 1861.
- Does "bodily harm" under sections 18, 20, and 47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 include psychiatric illness?
- The House of Lords held that "bodily harm" does include recognizable psychiatric illness.
- Lord Steyn explicitly endorsed the reasoning in R v Chan-Fook, stating it provided a sound and essential clarification of the law.
- Established Psychiatric Harm as Bodily Harm: This case definitively established that psychiatric illness can constitute "bodily harm" within the meaning of sections 18, 20, and 47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.
- Clarification of the Law: It clarified the scope of "bodily harm," ensuring that the law keeps pace with modern understanding of harm, including psychological harm.
0 Comments