Transcript
Hi, welcome to the Australian
Law Student Law Info Podcast,
your go to source for legal
insights in 4 minutes or less.
I'm Nick Hodgkinson and today
for our first episode we're
talking about the intentional
tort of battery.
But first, our obligatory
disclaimer.
The law info is produced by law
students.
For law students it is not, nor
is it intended to constitute
legal advice.
If you require legal assistance,
you should contact your local
Law Society who can direct you
appropriately.
For more information on the
Australian law student, visit
our website at the
oslawstudent.com OK Battery.
It's one of three main trespass
to the person, actions alongside
assault and false imprisonment.
Battery revolves around the
unlawful touching of one person
by another without consent.
Unlike negligence, where damage
is crucial, trespass to the
person, including battery, is
actionable per SE.
This means that the plaintiff
doesn't need to suffer any
damage before pursuing illegal
action.
So what exactly constitutes a
battery?
Well, battery involves a direct
and intentional interference
with another person, typically
through physical contact.
This can range from cutting
someone's hair without their
consent to more explicit acts
like spitting in someone's face.
The key elements to considering
a battery are directness and
positiveness and intention.
The touching must both be direct
and positive and intentional for
it to qualify as battery.
Interestingly, courts can take a
broadview of what constitutes a
positive act, especially if
there's a duty involved.
In the case of Fagan and
Metropolitan Police
Commissioner, the accused's
failure to reverse off of a
police officer's foot was deemed
a positive act, reinforcing the
intentional nature of battery.
It's essential to note that
hostility is not always a
necessary ingredient for
battery.
Even seemingly harmless actions
like an over friendly slap on
the back or a medical procedure
with mistaken consent can be
considered battery if they
transcend the bounds of
lawfulness.
In Australia, the concept of
consent will serve as a defense
to battery.
If the plaintiff consents to
touching, it will generally
prevent a battery claim.
As stated in the Department of
Health and Community Services
and JWB and SMB, also known as
Marion's Case, consent will
transform what would otherwise
be unlawful into accepted and
acceptable contact.
And let's not forget, there's an
implied consent to touching in
the hustle and bustle of
everyday life.
So next time you find yourself
in a crowded place, remember
implied consent might just be at
play.
And there you have it.
That's the first episode of the
Australian Law Students Law in
Full podcast, where we've
covered the elements of battery
in 4 minutes or less.
Join us next time on the
Australian Law Student Law in
full podcast.
As always, if you have any
suggestions, please e-mail us at
team at the Oslo student.com or
leave a comment in your review
on Spotify or Apple Podcasts.