[Rouz]

Could someone please explain the difference between the 2?

[Alas12]

S18 requires the prevention of a lawful arrest added onto s20.

[AnetaLovesYou]

also s. 18 might be with a use of weapon

[shazada.pathan]

(Original post by Rouz)
Could someone please explain the difference between the 2?

s20 - You are reckless or intend to cause 'some harm' (Savage & Parmenter)
s18 - You intend to cause grievously bodily harm which means "really serious harm" or "serious harm" (Smith / Saunders)

[ohyeahoh]

(Original post by shazada.pathan)
s20 - You are reckless or intend to cause 'some harm' (Savage & Parmenter)
s18 - You intend to cause grievously bodily harm which means "really serious harm" or "serious harm" (Smith / Saunders)

this and also something about resisting arrest

[Lell]

Also for s18 you can be reckless as to GBH when preventing/resisting a lawful arrest

[shazada.pathan]

Here's something extra I thought I'd post that I posted on another topic:

As a guide, and the minimum I think you should do to get a decent grade is, know the definitions of:

Common Assault - The D makes the V apprehend immediate personal violence - Smith 1983
Battery - The D applies physical force to the D and any touching will do - Collins v. Wilcock
ABH (s47 OAPA 1861) - Any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health and comfort of the victim and more than transient and trifiling - Donovan
GBH s20 OAPA 1861 - Smith 1960 - Really serious harm. GBH Wounding - Eisenhower - Wounding - A wound is a break in the continuity of the whole skin
GBH with intent s18 OAPA 1861 - You intend to cause serious harm (Smith/Saunders)

The mens rea for ABH and GBH is to intend or be reckless of 'some harm' (Mowatt / Savage & Parmenter)

Common assault and battery are common law offences although their existence is recognised in s39 of the Criminal Justice Act (Can't remember what year!) Hope that helps - let me know if you want more help, its revision for me for the exam on 17th June

[Scarlet rose]

S.20 must be committed on another person whereas s.18 states any person so could be committed on oneself.

S.20 carries max penalty 5 yrs whereas s.20 max penalty 25 yrs

See more here:

http://www.e-lawresources.co.uk/Woun...-%28GBH%29.php

[drfunkson]

Ok so here's the difference between s.20 and s.18 OAPA 1861:

s.20:
AR - to ''wound'' or ''inflict Grievous Bodily Harm'' (GBH).

MR - to ''maliciously'' cause GBH.

(Max sentence = 5 years)



s.18:
AR - to ''wound or ''cause GBH''

MR - 1) Unlawfully and ''maliciously'' wound or cause GBH, with the INTENT to:

a) cause GBH, or
b) resist or prevent the lawful apprehension or detainer of any person.

(Max sentence = life imprisonment)



The AR is essentially the same for both offences (except it's to ''cause'' GBH for s.18, rather than ''inflict'' GBH - an area of law which is still unclear as to what is meant by these terms). A ''wound'' requires both layers of skin to be broken (Moriarty v Brooks (1843)), even a cut that draws blood would technically suffice. ''GBH'' just means 'really serious harm' (DPP v Smith [1961]).

The key difference between s.18 and s.20 lies within the MR for each offence. The term ''maliciously'' means 'intention' or 'recklessness' to an offence (R v Cunningham [1957]). Therefore, with regards to s.20, the necessary MR requirement is for the defendant (D) to intend or be reckless to causing GBH.

It is not necessary for the prosecution to prove that D intended or was reckless to the exact nature of the harm caused, it is simply sufficient to prove that D was malicious (intent or reckless) to inflicting some bodily harm (ie. Actual Bodily Harm (ABH) - R v Savage; R v Parmanter [1992]). ABH = any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of a victim (R v Miller [1954]).
- eg. if Allan hit Bob on the head with a bat and broke his skull, then claimed that he thought it would break his jaw but never thought it would fracture his skull, Andy is still has the necessary MR for s.20, as it is only necessary for D to to be reckless to ABH).

The MR for s.18 requires two parts, the second part being referred to as 'ulterior intent':

1) D must ''maliciously'' (ie. intend or be reckless - R v Savage; R v Parmanter) ''wound'' or ''cause GBH'' with,
2) *Ulterior intent* to ''cause GBH'' or ''resist/prevent lawful arrest''.

So firstly, D must intend or be reckless to 'wounding' or 'causing GBH' with, secondly, the INTENT to 'cause GBH' or 'resist/prevent lawful arrest'.
It is important to recognise that D can be reckless to the injury (whether a wound or GBH) so long as he INTENDED (ulterior intent) to cause GBH or resist/prevent lawful arrest.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) will use charging standards to distinguish between whether harm amounts ABH or GBH.
ABH = minor cuts, swellings, bruises, minor fracture, temporary loss of consciousness etc.
GBH = permanent disability or loss of sensory function, substantial loss of blood, more than minor breaks, injury causing long periods of treatment or incapacity.

Hope this helps!