The Law of Tort Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 5000 words

The Law of Tort - Case Study Example Ancillary claims are founded on accusations of intentional infliction of emotional distress.4 The discussion that follows examines the development of the Tort of Trespass and the available defences to such claims. Assault is any conduct which puts an individual in fear of immediate unlawful harm or force upon his or her person.5 In other words, physical contact is not a necessary element in the Tort of assault. Intention to cause harm is not a necessary element in the Tort of Trespass to the person founded on a claim of assault. Lord Denning stated early on in the case of Letang v Cooper [1965] QB 232 that: Reasonable apprehension of injury or even mere contact is sufficient to substantiate a trespass to the person claim in assault. It matters not whether the intended victim is afraid or is capable of thwarting any assault. The test is an objective one and will depend on the reasonable apprehension of the reasonable man, rather than the particular and unique characteristics of the intended victim. In Stephens v Myers (1830) 4 C & P 349 the defendant was ordered to leave a parish meeting. In retaliation he launched for the chairman but the church warden quickly interceded and therefore no contact was made. After finding the defendant liable for the Tort of assault, Lord Tindal, CJ said that: For example in Thomas v Num [1986] Ch. ... However, if there is no reason to believe that the defendant can physically carry out his or her threat, the Tort of assault will not be substantiated. As Lord Tindal said: "'it is not every threat, when there is no actual physical violence, that constitutes an assault, there must, in all cases, be the means of carrying the threat into effect."8 For example in Thomas v Num [1986] Ch. 20 pickets making threats of violence accompanied by threatening gestures were held back by police and those to whom the threats were directed gained entry to the premises under protest via vehicles. There was no assault since the defendants could not have carried out their threatened conduct. In the circumstances of the case the reasonable man, having regard to the restraint placed upon the defendants by police presence could not have reasonably apprehended harm.9 At one time words alone could not constitute an assault. The case relied upon was R v Meade and Belt (1823) 1 Lew CC 184 in which it was held that: "'no words or singing are equivalent to an assault".10 However, in the case of R v Ireland [1998] AC 147 the House of Lords departed from this rule. Although the case itself was concerned with the criminal offence of assault it stands to reason that the same logic applies to the Tort of Trespass to the person with respect to assault. It was held that: "'the means by which persons of evil disposition may intentionally or carelessly cause another to fear immediate and unlawful violence vary according to circumstances".11 Lord went on to add that: "The proposition that a gesture may amount to an assault, but that words can never suffice, is unrealistic and indefensible. A thing said