Consenting to assault

ohnonotgmail

Something that came up on another thread but i am really only concerned with the legal side of it.

In the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act Assault is defined as

Assault.
2.—(1) A person shall be guilty of the offence of assault who, without lawful excuse, intentionally or recklessly—

(a) directly or indirectly applies force to or causes an impact on the body of another, or

(b) causes another to believe on reasonable grounds that he or she is likely immediately to be subjected to any such force or impact,

without the consent of the other.

(2) In subsection (1) (a), “force” includes—

(a) application of heat, light, electric current, noise or any other form of energy, and

(b) application of matter in solid liquid or gaseous form.

(3) No such offence is committed if the force or impact, not being intended or likely to cause injury, is in the circumstances such as is generally acceptable in the ordinary conduct of daily life and the defendant does not know or believe that it is in fact unacceptable to the other person.

(4) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £1,500 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to both.

Does the part in bold apply to 2(1)(b) only or to both 2(1)(a) and 2(1)(b). At first reading it seem to only apply to 2(1)(b) but going by the way it is formatted it could belong to both. So how should it be interpreted?

Mr. Incognito

It is both.

It applies to scenrio a or scenario b

Where consent is not given.

usernamegoes

Reminded me of this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Brown

Samuel T. Cogley

The older term of assault was the threat part of it as opposed to a battery (sp?).

BQQ

Sorry to hijack this thread, but the OP caught my interest
Does (b) imply merely threatening someone is assault?

Samuel T. Cogley

BQQ wrote: »

Sorry to hijack this thread, but the OP caught my interest
Does (b) imply merely threatening someone is assault?

Yes, see my post above, assault historically was the threat not the actual action.

However that threat has to be immediate, it can't be over the telephone for example (IIRC)

Edit or indeed the assizes.

tinner777

BQQ wrote: »

Sorry to hijack this thread, but the OP caught my interest
Does (b) imply merely threatening someone is assault?

yes