|
|
|
Home > Law > Law glossary > Law glossary
R v Fagan (1969)
Last modified: Thu Feb 23 16:37:37 2006
This case ([1969] 1 QB 439) demonstrates that although an
Assault cannot be commited by omission, it may be
possible to construe the ActusReus of assault
in such a way that a technicality cannot be used to clear the
accused in cases of clear wrongdoing. In this case, the
accused intentionally stopped his car on a policeman's foot
and refused to move it. In his defence he argued that although
he had the mens reus (intention)
and did the actus reus
(stopping the car), they were not coincidental. Refusing to
move the car was not, he argued, an assault in itself.
The court was not convinced by this argument. Instead it
construed the actus reus as a sequence of events
beginning when the car stopped and finishing when it
was moved off. During the latter part of this continuous
action, the accused had the mens rea. Accordingly
he was convicted of assaulting a police officer in the
course of his duty (s.51(1) of the PoliceAct1964).
CaseLaw
Law glossary index
|
|
|
|
Shameless plug
|
 By the author of this site. Buy on-line from Amazon USA | UK
|
|