APPLICATION
Thus the tort committed in this case is Battery under Trespass to Person. In this case, there is an intentional and direct application of force from Nathan to Alice as Nathan had intentionally creeps from behind and whipped her chair from under her.
This shows that the Defendant (Nathan) had applied the force with intention, which fulfilled the first element of Battery, the mental state of the Defendant. Next, Nathan (Defendant)’s act was under his control. Nathan had done a direct application of whipping Alice’s chair from under her, just as she about to sit on her chair. This shows that the second element of Battery is also fulfilled. In addition, the defendant need not actually touch the plaintiff using his or her body; the contact may be caused indirectly.
So there had been a contact/touching between Nathan and Alice, where Nathan used the chair as the medium of causing Battery towards Alice. Nathan had whipped Alice’s chair when she was about to sit on her chair, which caused her to fall to the ground and fractured her arm. Thus, the third element of Battery is also fulfilled as there was physical contact occurred in this case. Lastly, in this case, the tort committed was without the Plaintiff (Alice)’s consent. Nathan was liable for Battery for making Alice falls to the ground until she fractured her arm.
CONCLUSION
Since all the elements of Battery has been fulfilled in this case of Nathan and Alice, which are the mental state of the Defendant, Defendant’s act was under his control, there is physical contact occurred, and without the Plaintiff’s consent, therefore, it can be conclude that there is tort committed in this case which is Battery under Trespass to Person, and Nathan is liable to the tort of Battery.
What torts, if any, have been committed in the following situation: Just as Alice is sitting down on a chair, Nathan creeps up from behind and whips the chair from under her. Alice falls to the ground and fractures her arm. Battery may be defined as the intentional and direct application of force to another person without that person’s consent. An act is a battery if it causes physical pain or injury to a person’s body.
It may also be an act that is offensive to a reasonable person. The issue here is whether there is tort committed of Battery under Trespass to Person. The first element that needs to be fulfilled in order to make sure that there is tort committed is The Mental State of the Defendant. The Defendant must have applied the force with intention.
And it is said that no violence is necessary and any physical contact with the body of the Plaintiff or his clothing is sufficient enough to constitute “force”. While the second element that needs to be fulfilled is The Defendant’s Act Was Under His Control. There is Battery committed when the Defendant’s act was done voluntarily and under his control. According to the case of Gibbons v. Pepper, the Defendant was riding a horse when someone hit the horse from behind, causing the horse to bolt. The horse collided with the Plaintiff.
The court decided that the Defendant was not liable as the act of the horse bolting was outside his control. The third element that needs to be fulfilled in order to make sure that there is Battery occurred, is the physical contact between the Plaintiff and Defendant. It is said that there must be some contact/touching with the Plaintiff’s body. According to the case of Collins v. Wilcock, a police officer held a woman with the intention of temporarily detaining her. The court decided that the contact was hostile, as the police officer did not have the authority to detain her.
And lastly, the fourth element of Battery that need to be fulfilled is The Act Was Without Plaintiff’s Consent. One cannot touch another person without his consent or without lawful justification. Example, from the case of Tiong Pik Hiong v. Wong Siew Gieu, the Defendant was liable for battery for scratching the Plaintiff’s face and hitting her, due to her (Defendant) jealousy of the Plaintiff’s friendship with her husband. However, no battery if consent is given by Plaintiff expressly or impliedly. Example of implied consent is tapping a person’s shoulder in order to get his attention, or touching that occur while queuing for a train.
Thus, the tort committed in this case is Battery under Trespass to Person. In this case, there is an intentional and direct application of force from Nathan to Alice as Nathan had intentionally creeps from behind and whipped her chair from under her. This shows that the Defendant (Nathan) had applied the force with intention, which fulfilled the first element of Battery, the mental state of the Defendant. Next, Nathan (Defendant)’s act was under his control. Nathan had done a direct application of whipping Alice’s chair from under her, just as she about to sit on her chair.
This shows that the second element of Battery is also fulfilled. In addition, the defendant need not actually touch the plaintiff using his or her body; the contact may be caused indirectly. So there had been a contact/touching between Nathan and Alice, where Nathan used the chair as the medium of causing Battery towards Alice. Nathan had whipped Alice’s chair when she was about to sit on her chair, which caused her to fall to the ground and fractured her arm. Thus, the third element of Battery is also fulfilled as there was physical contact occurred in this case.
Lastly, in this case, the tort committed was without the Plaintiff (Alice)’s consent. Nathan was liable for Battery for making Alice falls to the ground until she fractured her arm. Since all the elements of Battery has been fulfilled in this case of Nathan and Alice, which are the mental state of the Defendant, Defendant’s act was under his control, there is physical contact occurred, and without the Plaintiff’s consent, therefore, it can be conclude that there is tort committed in this case which is Battery under Trespass to Person, and Nathan is liable to the tort of Battery.
