e-lawresources
Providing resources for studying law
 
Custom Search
   Home      R v Savage
R v Savage [1991] 94 Cr App R 193

The defendant threw a pint of beer over the victim in a pub. The glass slipped out of her hand and smashed and cut the victim's wrist. The victim was her husband's ex girlfriend and there had been bad feeling between the two. The defendant maintained that it was never her intention to throw the glass just to humiliate her by throwing the beer. The trial judge directed the jury that malicious meant that an unlawful act was deliberate and aimed against the victim and resulted in the wound. The jury convicted and the appellant appealed. The Court of Appeal held this was a mis-direction as it did not correctly state that malicious included recklessness and this is decided subjectively. The Court of Appeal substituted a conviction of ABH under s.47 OAPA 1861 and certified a point of law to the House of Lords as to whether it was necessary under s.20 to establish that the defendant intended or was reckless as to the infliction of GBH or whether it was sufficient that the defendant foresaw some harm.

Held:

It was not necessary to demonstrate the defendant had the mens rea in relation to level of harm inflicted. It was sufficient that they intended or could foresee that some harm will result.
 
Back to lecture outline on wounding and GBH