TRESPASS TO THE PERSON
Across
- 3. This defence is justified to prevent greater harm
- 7. Directly and intentionally applying unlawful force
- 10. Total bodily restraint without safe means of escape
- 15. Assault negated by words (“If it were not assize time…”)
- 17. V COOPER Case distinguishing negligence from trespass
- 18. Trespass to the person is ___________ per se — no damage needed.
Down
- 1. Claimant need not be aware of false imprisonment
- 2. Indirect intentional harm case — causing nervous shock by words
- 4. Locked toilet false imprisonment case
- 5. Permission as a defence in trespass
- 6. v Metropolitan police-Case establishing “continuing act” for battery; car on officer’s foot
- 8. involve threatening behaviour which is real and imminent
- 9. v Jones False imprisonment must be total restriction
- 11. Hostility test for battery
- 12. Intent can move between victims
- 13. The defendant must this to carry out the threat at the time of the assault
- 14. Silent phone calls can constitute assault
- 16. V WILCOCK Slightest touching can be unlawful