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.