Explain direct act
According to leame v Bray, the act of the defendant is direct if the contact flows form the act of the defendant or is as a result of the defendant’s act
Explain how directness is explain in Scott v Shepherd
Intervening acts done involuntarily or under compulsion does not break directness.
What does the element of voluntariness mean ?
The defendant must not only acts freely or on his own accord but must also have control over their actions. Gibbons v Pepper
Explain the element of intention
To prove battery, the plaintiff must prove deliberate or negligent contact.
Stanley v Powell: there is not liable once the act is accidental.
Also in Fowler v Lanning, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to proof intention
Is the intention to cause injury of to make contact
Wilson v Pringle: intention is to make contact not to cause injury
Does consent extinguish battery?
Consent must match the nature of the act for which it was given. Nash v Sheen
But can cosent be presumed ?
Cole v Turner. Consent is presumed in everyday, non-hostile and casual contact.
If a person makes contact as a result of failure to act, are they still liable for battery?
No. In Innes v Wylie, battery requires te element of positive action not an omission
