Assaults and other

Personal Injuries
Advocate Mugero Jesse
 Assault

• Assault and Battering were originally common law offences, triable only on indictment as
common law assault.
• A person is guilty of assault if he/she intentionally or recklessly causes another person to
apprehend the application to his body of immediate unlawful force.
• An assault can be committed even though the victim cannot see the accused as where
the threat is made in total darkness or even over the phone.
• Even silence can suffice if it has the necessary results.
• Section 235 of the Penal Code Act
Advocate Mugero Jesse 24/02/2022 2
 Constanza’s case (1997) CLR 578

• In this case, the court of Appeal stressed that what is important for the
prosecution to prove is what is on the victim’s mind, how it got there,
whether by seeing an action or threat and whether that threat conveyed
verbally or in the presence of the victim or over or in presence of the victim
or over the phone or when the fear was aroused through something written
whether be it a letter or facts, seems to be irrelevant.

Advocate Mugero Jesse 24/02/2022 3

• The requirement that immediate application of force must be apprehended,
means that
• A) Pointing any unloaded gun/imitation of a gun at/to a person who is unaware
of its harmness can amount to assault.
• B) Inviting another to tough the inviter can’t amount to assault on the invitee.
• C) A person may be guilty of an assault if he shakes his fist at another in a certain
manner. Here, the question isn’t whether the accused’s conduct caused an
immediate fear but whether it causes fear with immediate unlawful force.

Advocate Mugero Jesse 24/02/2022 4

• If the circumstances are such tat there can’t be any fear that the threat
would be carried out immediately, there is no assault. Moreover, the
threatening gesture may be accompanied by words indicating that there is
no intention to carry it out.

Advocate Mugero Jesse 24/02/2022 5

 Reading Assignments

• Kwaku Mensah v R (1946) AC 83

• Fairclough v Whipp (1951) 2 ALLER 834

• Tuberville v Savage (1669) 1 mod rep 3

Advocate Mugero Jesse 24/02/2022 6
• In summary, common assault refers to an offence in which a person’s unlawful
action causes fear to another. If A intends to punch B and C intervenes by
stopping A, A is liable because he caused fear to B.
• For the offence to stand, the accused should be in a situation of causing threat.
For example, a person in a moving car putting an expression on his face that he
is about to strangle you. Since he has no ability to do it because he is in a
moving car, it cannot qualify as assault.
• If a person says to harm in the future, it cannot be common assault.

Advocate Mugero Jesse 24/02/2022 7

 Aggravated Assault

• Section 236 and 238 (b) of the Penal Code Act

• The most common offences of aggravated assault are assault occasioning
bodily harm and indecent assault.
• In this case, the Prosecution must prove the actus reus of commission of the
offence and the assault causing actual bodily harm.

Advocate Mugero Jesse 24/02/2022 8

• RE: Miller (1954) 2 ALLER 529
• Justice Lynskey stated that actual bodily harm means any harm or injury
calculated to interfere with health and comfort of the victim. Such harm or
injury does not have to be permanent but must be more than transient or
trifling. The meaning of actual body harm was further explained in the case of
Chanfook (1994)2 ALLER 552
• It was held that harm is a sign of injury and actually indicates that the injury
should not be trivial or insignificant. The court of appeal further observed that
bodily harm is not limited to skin, hand , flesh of the victim but it included all
parts of the body responsible for his mental faculties.

Advocate Mugero Jesse 24/02/2022 9

• The Ugandan courts require medical evidence to prove the charges of
assault. Medical evidence will assist court in ascertaining whether it is trivial
or grevious harm.

Advocate Mugero Jesse 24/02/2022 10