Law - How to define offences which do not appear to be defined?

Consider the Children Act 2004. It is stated in Section 58(1) that "battery of a child cannot be justified on the ground that it constituted reasonable punishment”. Then in Section 58(3) it is stated: "Battery of a child causing actual bodily harm to the child cannot be justified in any civil proceedings on the ground that it constituted reasonable punishment".

Now, I would like to find the definition of 'battery' and of 'reasonable punishment' - what constitutes both. But there does not appear to be anything anywhere providing a proper definition?

There are some comments that reasonable punishment is available where the injury is only "transient and trifling", and it has also been mentioned that reasonable punishment is defined somewhere. But WHERE? I have no idea where any of this is coming from and I feel I'm missing a trick here. Please help! Thank you in advance!

Reply 1

Joleee

battery and reasonable is defined in case law - not statute law.

maybe this helps? i only have 5 mins on my lunch break so best i can do atm

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/344503/Review_of_Section_58_of_the_Children_Act_2004.pdf

(also moved to Law study help :smile:

)

Reply 2

IpsaLoquitur

I've done a guide on battery, which as mentioned above is a common law offence: https://ipsaloquitur.com/criminal-law/assault-battery/
See also the bottom of this page for a bit on the chastisement offence: https://ipsaloquitur.com/criminal-law/defences-to-non-fatal-personal-offences/

Reply 3

Forum User

Original post by GeorgeMoriarty

Consider the Children Act 2004. It is stated in Section 58(1) that "battery of a child cannot be justified on the ground that it constituted reasonable punishment”. Then in Section 58(3) it is stated: "Battery of a child causing actual bodily harm to the child cannot be justified in any civil proceedings on the ground that it constituted reasonable punishment".

There are some comments that reasonable punishment is available where the injury is only "transient and trifling", and it has also been mentioned that reasonable punishment is defined somewhere. But WHERE? I have no idea where any of this is coming from and I feel I'm missing a trick here. Please help! Thank you in advance!

"Transient and trifling" comes from R v Donovan [1934] 2 KB 498 where it was held that "bodily harm" (in relation to the offence of assault causing ABH) includes any hurt calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of the victim, which need not be permanent but must be more than transient and trifling.

So, if the injury is only "transient and trifling", it does not amount to ABH and

(i) No offence within s. 58(2) has been committed (except perhaps the cruelty to children offence which I do not know the definition of) and so s. 58(1) does not apply;

(ii) s. 58(3) does not apply to prevent the reasonable punishment defence being available in civil proceedings.

Law - How to define offences which do not appear to be defined?

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you