Section 47 Of The Offences Against The Person Act

Section 47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861: Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm (ABH)

Section 47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 (OAPA 1861) criminalizes assault occasioning actual bodily harm (ABH). This offence sits midway in severity between common assault (which requires no physical harm) and more serious offences like wounding or grievous bodily harm (GBH). Understanding Section 47 is crucial for anyone involved in the legal system, from lawyers and judges to members of the public who may be victims or accused. This article provides a comprehensive overview of the offence, examining its elements, key case law, and potential defences.

Introduction: Understanding the Offence

Section 47 states:

“Whosoever shall be convicted upon an indictment of any assault occasioning actual bodily harm shall be liable…to be imprisoned for any term not exceeding five years.”

This seemingly simple sentence encapsulates a complex offence requiring careful consideration of its constituent parts. The prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt both an assault and that the assault occasioned actual bodily harm. Let's break down each element:

Element 1: The Assault

To establish an assault under Section 47, the prosecution must prove two elements:

• Actus Reus (Guilty Act): This involves an act which causes the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful personal violence. This is a subjective test; it's not about whether the victim actually feared violence, but whether a reasonable person in their position would have feared immediate unlawful personal violence. Mere words can constitute an assault, as demonstrated in R v Ireland; R v Burstow. The threat must be of immediate violence; a threat of future violence is not sufficient.

• Mens Rea (Guilty Mind): The prosecution must prove that the defendant intended to cause the victim to apprehend immediate unlawful personal violence, or was reckless as to whether the victim would apprehend such violence. Recklessness means the defendant foresaw the risk of causing the victim to apprehend violence but went ahead anyway.

Element 2: Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm (ABH)

The second element requires proving that the assault occasioned actual bodily harm. This means a causal link must be established between the assault and the harm suffered. The harm need not be a significant injury; it simply needs to be more than transient or trifling.

• Actual Bodily Harm: This has been interpreted broadly by the courts. It includes any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of the victim. This includes:

  • Minor injuries: Bruises, grazes, scratches, swelling, black eyes, minor cuts.
  • Psychological harm: While traditionally more associated with offences like GBH, some psychological injuries can amount to ABH if they are sufficiently serious. Cases such as R v Chan-Fook clarified that psychiatric illness may constitute ABH if it is a recognised medical condition, not merely transient emotion. R v Ireland and R v Burstow further expanded this principle, showing that psychological harm caused by words or silent phone calls could constitute ABH.
  • Temporary loss of consciousness: Even a brief loss of consciousness can be considered ABH.

• Occasioning: This refers to the causal link between the assault and the ABH. The prosecution must demonstrate that the assault caused the harm. This doesn't require a direct causal link; it's sufficient if the harm was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the assault.

Case Law: Key Precedents

Several landmark cases have shaped the interpretation of Section 47:

• R v Miller (1954): This case established the broad interpretation of "actual bodily harm" to include any injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of the victim.

• R v Chan-Fook (1994): This case clarified that psychiatric injury can amount to ABH, provided it's a recognised medical condition and not simply transient emotion.

• R v Ireland; R v Burstow (1997): These cases significantly broadened the scope of ABH to include psychological harm caused by silent phone calls and other forms of harassment, even without physical contact. They highlighted the importance of considering the context and impact of the actions on the victim.

• DPP v Smith (1961): This case demonstrates that the prosecution doesn't need to prove the defendant intended to cause ABH. Recklessness as to the risk of causing ABH is sufficient.

Defences to Section 47

Various defences may be available to someone charged under Section 47, depending on the specific circumstances of the case:

• Consent: Consent can be a valid defence to assault, but it's rarely successful in cases involving ABH. The courts generally require a high threshold for consent in cases involving injury, with limited exceptions (e.g., certain sporting activities, medical procedures).

• Self-defence: If the defendant used force to defend themselves or another person from unlawful attack, this could be a complete defence. The force used must be reasonable and proportionate to the threat faced.

• Insanity: If the defendant was suffering from a mental disorder that rendered them incapable of understanding the nature of their actions or knowing that their actions were wrong, this could be a defence.

• Intoxication: Voluntary intoxication is generally not a defence, but it can be relevant to the issue of mens rea in some cases. Involuntary intoxication may be a defence if it renders the defendant incapable of forming the necessary mens rea.

Sentencing for Section 47 Offences

Sentencing for Section 47 offences varies depending on the severity of the ABH, the defendant's previous convictions, and other mitigating or aggravating factors. Possible sentences include:

• Fine: For less serious cases.
• Community orders: Such as unpaid work or curfew.
• Imprisonment: Up to five years, although this is typically reserved for more serious cases involving significant injuries.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

• Q: What is the difference between Section 47 and Section 20 OAPA 1861? A: Section 20 deals with wounding or inflicting GBH, which are more serious offences than ABH. Section 20 requires proof of more serious harm and can lead to significantly longer prison sentences.

• Q: Can a Section 47 charge be brought even if there's no direct physical contact? A: Yes, as evidenced by R v Ireland and R v Burstow, psychological harm caused without physical contact can amount to ABH.

• Q: What constitutes "recklessness" in the context of Section 47? A: Recklessness means the defendant foresaw the risk of causing the victim to apprehend violence or causing ABH and went ahead anyway.

Conclusion: A Complex Offence Demanding Careful Consideration

Section 47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 is a complex offence requiring careful consideration of its constituent elements and the relevant case law. The prosecution must prove both an assault and that the assault occasioned actual bodily harm. The broad interpretation of "actual bodily harm" encompasses a wide range of injuries, including psychological harm. Several defences may be available, depending on the specific circumstances. Understanding this offence is crucial for anyone involved in the legal system, from lawyers and judges to the public. This article provides a solid foundation for navigating the intricacies of this important area of criminal law. Remember, this information is for educational purposes only and should not be considered legal advice. If you have any legal questions, you should seek the advice of a qualified legal professional.