P I 0 0 7 LAW083 B Y : N U R M I R Z A A F R I N A Z A M R I ( 2 0 2 2 4 8 5 4 0 8 ) B Y : S Y A R A H I N S Y I R A H S A L I M A N ( 2 0 2 2 6 1 8 0 1 8 ) B Y : N I K N A D I A A M I R A N I K M O H D A R I F F ( 2 0 2 2 8 9 5 3 8 6 ) B Y : D H I A I R D I N A A B D U L K A D I R R I F A E I ( 2 0 2 2 6 1 8 5 8 8 ) BBaatttteerryy
Table of Contents Index ISSUE 00 00 00 00 00 LAW Elements of Battery Recent Case Law 00 00 00 00 00 APPLICATION How law will be apply in the undecided case 00 00 00 00 00 CONCLUSION 00 00 00 00 00 NEWSPAPER CUTTING Page 02
NEWSPAPER CUTTING Facts of the case: Incident took place on the last day of Kamal Adli and his wife’s successful expo in Singapore. Reportedly, Malaysian actor Kamal Adli and his wife Uqasha Senrose were in Singapore when an individual seriously attacked the actor and left him with a head injury.
SECTION 1: ISSUE Whether the act of a man who physically attacked that caused a Malaysian famous actor, Kamal Adli a severe injury can be charged under the offence of battery?
Battery can be defined as the intentional and sudden exertion of physical force or violence upon someone without their consent or authorization. There are four elements of battery which are; the mental state of the defendant, the defendant’s act was under his control, physical contact, and finally, the action by the defendant was without the plaintiff’s consent. The first element is the mental state of the defendant. The defendant's deliberate application of force can be identified as the reason for their actions. The use of force doesn't require violence, and mere physical contact with the plaintiff's body or clothing is enough to be considered as force. While it is typically assumed that a defendant's intention applies specifically to their own actions, the transferred intent doctrine broadens the definition of intention, which can result in an expanded range of liability for the defendant. w w w . r e a l l y g r e a t s i t e . c o m mirza SECTION 2: LAW
B A T T E R Y The second element of battery is the defendant’s act was under his control. The defendant’s act must be forced voluntarily and without being constrained by another party. The defendant must have either intended to cause the harmful or offensive contact, or they must have been aware that such contact was highly likely to result from their actions. This implies that the defendant must have acted with the intention of making contact or with the knowledge that contact would very probably occur due to their actions. SECTION 2: LAW The fourth element is without the plaintiff’s consent. If there were physical contact, one cannot touch another person without his consent or without lawful justification. At the point when an individual deliberately causes unsafe or hostile contact with someone else, the demonstration is battery. However, the plaintiff is not liable if they participated in a particular event or circumstance such as playing sports with the defendant, or impliedly consented to such an act. The third element of battery is physical contact. There must be contact or touching with the plaintiff’s body or clothing. An offensive contact of battery is one that makes a reasonable person of ordinary sensibilities feel threatened, while a harmful contact of battery is one that results in physical impairment or injury. According to the case Tan Heng Huat V Tan Hee Soon, an unkowned man honked the horn of a Honda vehicle because the man's vehicle was blocked by a White Myvi car in front of the Plaintiff's house. Not long after, the Defendant left the shop premises and went straight into the Plaintiff's yard to confront the Plaintiff about the noise incident. A war of words has happened and causes the defendent to punch him on the face and chest continuously until the plaintiff fell to the concrete ground. The court found that the injuries suffered by the Plaintiff had been confirmed by SP3 who showed that there was a fractured injury in the right pelvis, eye and right arm of the Plaintiff and further this injury was consistent with the testimony of the Plaintiff and SP2 who saw the incident of the Defendant punching the Plaintiff. It was held that there was physical contact from the defendant when he punched the plaintiff in the face and the chest
CASE LAW
SECOND ELEMENT: the defendant’s act was under his control. FIRST ELEMENT: the mental state of the defendant. Based on this case, the plaintiff was taking a picture for Instagram with his wife and an aunt in a wheelchair. Suddenly, there’s a man came and asked ‘Where is Kamal?’ and suddenly took out his coat from his pocket and kept hitting the back of Kamal’s head repeatedly until blood splattered on his shirt. On top of that, it was also reported that the unknown man hit Kamal Adli on the cheekbone too. The attacker was with a sharp weapon as well. This has left the plaintiff with a long deep wound on the back of his head. Reportedly the man has personal issues with the plaintiff. Some speculated that he attacked the plaintiff for marrying the plaintiff's wife, Uqasha Senrose. This demonstrates that the defendant plainly intended to harm the plaintiff since he was holding a grudge and dissatisfied with the plaintiff. The defendant committed battery, causing serious injuries to the plaintiff. We can conclude from this that the appellant intends to do injury to the respondent. To determine the tort of a battery, there are four elements that have to be fulfilled to establish a successful battery. APPLICATION: Following this case, the defendant inquired about the plaintiff's whereabouts before repeatedly striking the plaintiff's head with a coat until blood splattered on the plaintiff's shirt. Plaintiff was also assaulted in the cheekbone by the aggressor. All of these assaults were carried out in public, at a commercial funfair event where the plaintiff was cheerfully taking a picture with his wife and his aunt in a wheelchair. None of these individuals were pressuring or persuading the defendant to conduct such an act. As a result, he had complete control over the strikes.
THIRD ELEMENT: REQUIRES THE ACT TO INVOLVES PHYSICAL CONTACT As stated in the first two paragraphs, the defendant approached the plaintiff and suddenly began to attack the plaintiff by repeatedly hitting the back of plaintiff's head until blood splattered on his shirt while plaintiff was happily taking group pictures together during an expo in Singapore. The unknown individual was also said to have hit the plaintiff on the cheekbone. The plaintiff has a lengthy, deep wound on the back of his head as a result of this. As a result, it is obvious that the defendant initiated hostile physical contact with the plaintiff with the aim to damage him. FOURTH ELEMENT: REQUIRES THE ACT OF BATTERY TO BE DONE WITHOUT THE PLAINTIF'S CONSENT According to this case, plaintiff was just taking a group picture after a successful expo in Singapore, later was seriously attacked multiple times by the defendant that resulted him to suffer severe head injuries and had to undergo several stitches and surgery. Therefore, this has concluded that the plaintiff was hit and attacked by the defendant without his consent.
In conclusion, the issue from the newspaper clipping can be characterised as a successful battery because it met all four requirements (the defendant's mental condition, the defendant's act was under his control, physical contact, and without the plaintiff's consent). As a result, battery is a civil as well as a criminal violation. The plaintiff has both civil and criminal remedies. If the plaintiff wants compensation, he can go to civil court, but if he wants to punish the tortfeasor with imprisonment, he can go to criminal court. A battery is any willful and unlawful use of force or violence upon the person of another (Cal Penal Code §242). So an assault is an attempted battery, and a battery is a successful assault CONCLUSION
REFERENCES Ariffin, F. F. (2023, March 13). Kamal Adli teruk dipukul lelaki bercota warga Singapura yang disangka peminat. Berita Harian. https://www.bharian.com.my/hiburan/selebrit i/2023/03/1076124/kamal-adli-teruk-dipukullelaki-bercota-warga-singapura-yang Tan Peng Huat lwn Tan Hee Soon [2021] MLJU 1003 Torts 1.2 – Battery. (n.d.-a). https://7sage.com/lawschool/lesson/torts -1-2-battery/