Home/Topics/Non-fatal Offences
Crime

Non-fatal Offences Practice Questions

Free NPPF Step 2 Non-fatal Offences questions with full answers, for Sergeant and Inspector candidates.

25+ questions in the full bankType A format

About this topic

Non-fatal offences against the person run from common assault and battery up to wounding and grievous bodily harm with intent. The exam tests the level of injury, the mental element for each offence, and which charge fits the facts.

Expect questions on what amounts to actual bodily harm, the difference between s.20 and s.18, the mens rea for s.47, and assaults on emergency workers.

Key legislation and cases

  • Offences Against the Person Act 1861, ss.18, 20 and 47
  • Criminal Justice Act 1988, s.39
  • Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018

Worked examples

Try each question before opening the answer. Every option is explained, because the exam usually turns on why the near-miss answers are wrong.

Worked question 1 of 2Standard

During an argument Pearce punches Harris twice in the face. Harris suffers a black eye and a cut lip which bleeds but does not require stitches. Both injuries heal within a week. DC Osei is considering the appropriate charge. Which of the following is correct?

  1. AThese injuries are capable of amounting to actual bodily harm under s.47 Offences Against the Person Act 1861
  2. BThese injuries amount to grievous bodily harm as they involved bleeding and visible injury to the face
  3. CThese injuries are too minor to amount to actual bodily harm - ABH requires injuries that are more than merely transient
  4. DPearce can only be charged with common assault as the injuries did not require medical treatment
Show answer and explanation
Answer: A

s.47 OAPA 1861 requires proof of an assault or battery that occasions actual bodily harm. ABH was defined in R v Chan-Fook [1994] as injury that is more than transient or trifling - it need not be serious or permanent. A black eye and a bleeding cut lip clearly exceed the transient and trifling threshold and are capable of amounting to ABH. Medical treatment is not a prerequisite. GBH requires really serious harm - these injuries do not approach that threshold.

s.47 Offences Against the Person Act 1861; R v Chan-Fook [1994] 1 WLR 689
s.47: whosoever shall be convicted on indictment of any assault occasioning actual bodily harm shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.
  • B: GBH under s.18 or s.20 OAPA 1861 requires really serious harm. A black eye and a cut lip that heals within a week does not meet that standard. The appropriate charge is s.47 not GBH.
  • C: The injuries are not merely transient or trifling. A black eye and a cut lip that bleeds clearly exceeds the de minimis threshold for ABH established in Chan-Fook.
  • D: Medical treatment is not a requirement for ABH. The test is whether the injury is more than transient or trifling - not whether a doctor was consulted.
Worked question 2 of 2Standard

PC Fletcher attends an incident where Gareth has punched Kevin during an argument, causing bruising to his face. DS Hartley is considering the appropriate charge. Which of the following correctly states the mens rea required for assault occasioning actual bodily harm under s.47 OAPA 1861?

  1. AThe defendant must intend to cause actual bodily harm or be reckless as to whether actual bodily harm is caused.
  2. BThe defendant must intend to cause apprehension of unlawful force or be reckless as to whether such apprehension is caused - no mens rea is required as to the bodily harm itself.
  3. CThe defendant must be subjectively reckless as to whether bodily harm of some kind will result from their act.
  4. DThe defendant must intend to cause bodily harm - recklessness is insufficient for s.47.
Show answer and explanation
Answer: B

The mens rea for s.47 OAPA 1861 is the mens rea for the underlying assault or battery only. Following R v Savage; R v Parmenter [1992] the House of Lords confirmed that no additional mens rea is required as to the actual bodily harm - the prosecution need only prove the mens rea for the assault and the fact that actual bodily harm resulted.

s.47 OAPA 1861; R v Savage; R v Parmenter [1992] 1 AC 699
s.47: Whosoever shall be convicted upon an indictment of any assault occasioning actual bodily harm shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.
  • A: s.47 does not require the defendant to intend or be reckless as to the actual bodily harm itself. The mens rea relates to the assault only, not the resulting harm. This is confirmed in R v Savage; R v Parmenter [1992].
  • C: Subjective recklessness as to bodily harm is the mens rea for s.20 OAPA 1861 - not s.47. Imposing that requirement on s.47 would conflate the two offences.
  • D: Intention to cause bodily harm is not required for s.47. The mens rea is for the assault only - the bodily harm is a consequence, not something the defendant must have intended or foreseen.

Practise every Non-fatal Offences question

The full bank has 25+ questions on Non-fatal Offences and over 1,100 across the whole syllabus, each with the statute and an explanation for every option. £29 for 6 months.

Get full accessTry 5 free questions
More Crime topics
Actus Reus20+ questions in the bankMens Rea20+ questions in the bankGeneral Defences20+ questions in the bankIncomplete Offences25+ questions in the bankHomicide25+ questions in the bankSexual Offences40+ questions in the bankChild Protection25+ questions in the bankCriminal Damage20+ questions in the bankMisuse of Drugs25+ questions in the bankFirearms25+ questions in the bankWeapons20+ questions in the bankTheft and Related45+ questions in the bankFraud20+ questions in the bankOffences Against Justice20+ questions in the bankDeprivation of Liberty20+ questions in the bankRacially and Religiously Aggravated Offences20+ questions in the bank