FLK2 · Criminal Liability

Non-fatal offences against the person

SQE1 revision notes — the key rules, leading cases and common traps for this topic, in plain English and current to 2026.

CRL.04 — Non-fatal offences against the person

A hierarchy of five offences. Learn the actus reus (AR), mens rea (MR), and where each sits.

The offences

Assault (common assault) — summary, s.39 CJA 1988.

AR: causing the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful personal violence.
MR: intention or recklessness (Cunningham subjective recklessness) as to causing that apprehension.
Words alone can be assault (Ireland); words can also negate one (Tuberville v Savage). No touching needed.

Battery — summary, s.39 CJA 1988.

AR: infliction of unlawful force on another (any unwanted touching, however slight — Collins v Wilcock).
MR: intention or recklessness as to applying unlawful force. Can be indirect (DPP v K — acid in hand dryer).

ABH — s.47 OAPA 1861, either-way.

AR: assault or battery that causes actual bodily harm (harm more than trivial; includes psychiatric injury — Chan-Fook; cutting hair — DPP v Smith).
MR: only the MR for the assault/battery. No need to foresee the ABH (Roberts, Savage). This is the classic trap.

s.20 GBH/wounding — OAPA 1861, either-way.

AR: unlawfully wound (break both layers of skin — JCC v Eisenhower) or inflict GBH (really serious harm — DPP v Smith; Saunders).
MR: intention or recklessness as to some harm — not the full extent (Mowatt, Parmenter).

s.18 GBH/wounding with intent — OAPA 1861, indictable only.

AR: as s.20.
MR: intention to cause GBH (recklessness will not do), or intention to resist/prevent lawful arrest. Specific-intent offence.

Common traps and distinctions

s.20 vs s.18 is the MR: s.18 needs intent to do GBH; recklessness can never satisfy s.18.
A wound needs broken skin — internal bleeding/bruising is not a wound (but may be GBH).
Foresight rule differs by offence: ABH and s.20 need no foresight of the level of harm; only s.18 demands intent.
Consent (general rule Brown): valid only for recognised exceptions — properly conducted sport, surgery, tattooing/piercing, horseplay (Jones), reasonable chastisement (now abolished in Scotland/Wales; limited in England). Consent is generally no defence to ABH or worse.
Transmission/transferred malice: MR transfers between victims, not between offence types.
A single act can be charged at the level the harm and MR support — pick the highest the facts prove.

Try a real SQE1 question

Straight from the bank. Answer it, then see the worked reasoning and the tutor — no signup to try.

A woman is the treasurer of a small amateur football club. Members pay £20 each month in cash, which the woman is instructed by the club's rules to bank into the club's dedicated account within seven days. One month she receives £200 in subscriptions but, being short of money, uses the cash to pay her own gas bill. She intends to replace the £200 from her wages before anyone notices, and she does in fact pay an equivalent £200 into the club account two weeks later. The woman is charged with theft of the £200. Which of the following is the strongest basis for finding the property belonged to another at the time she used it?

Before you book a £1,934 exam

Strong on this topic? SQE1 tests 137 of them — and 59% failed in July 2025. See where you stand across all of them, free.

✓An AI tutor on every question that already knows the answer — the part nothing else has
✓5 full mock papers at real exam pace, plus unlimited drilling — no daily cap
✓The whole 2,000+ bank, verified and source-cited to the law, all 137 areas
✓Your weak-spot map: exactly where you’re losing marks

Start my free diagnostic — one tap →

Free. No card. 25 questions, about 15 minutes. Full SQE1 courses run £1,500–£4,000 — this starts at £0.

Non-fatal offences against the person

CRL.04 — Non-fatal offences against the person

The offences

Common traps and distinctions

Try a real SQE1 question

More Criminal Liability topics