Cole v Turner [1705]

1. Facts:

• Scenario: D jostled C while trying to pass in a narrow street.

• Issue: Whether this action constituted battery.

2. Outcome:

• Verdict: Convicted of battery.

• Reasoning: The court held that any touching in anger, no matter how slight, constitutes battery. If the touching occurred without any anger, it would not be considered battery.

3. Impact and Analysis:

• Principle of Battery:

◦ Definition: This case helps define battery as the intentional and unlawful physical contact with another person. The presence of anger in the action is a key factor in establishing battery.

◦ Anger Element: The court's decision highlights that the element of anger or hostility in the act of touching is essential in distinguishing between lawful and unlawful contact.

• Legal Implications:

◦ Minimal Contact: The ruling emphasises that even minimal contact can be considered battery if done with anger or hostility.

• Precedent and Future Applications:

◦ Broad Scope of Battery: This case broadens the understanding of battery to include minor physical contacts if done in anger, influencing how future cases might interpret similar incidents.

◦ Judicial Reasoning: The decision illustrates the court's approach in evaluating the intention and context of the physical contact, which could guide future interpretations and applications in battery cases.