R v. St George
Rule established
Creating a reasonable apprehension of imminent harm through pointing a loaded firearm at another constitutes assault, even without the threatened force actually being carried out.
Facts
- The defendant pointed a loaded firearm directly at the victim. The victim reasonably apprehended imminent harm from this act. The firearm was not actually discharged. The question was whether this conduct, absent any actual discharge, constituted assault.
Issue
- Whether pointing a loaded firearm at another person, without actually discharging it, constitutes assault.
Held
- The act of pointing the firearm created a genuine, reasonable apprehension of imminent unlawful force. This apprehension is itself sufficient to establish assault. Actual discharge of the firearm, or any actual contact, is not required. The defendant's conduct constituted assault.
Ratio Decidendi
Assault requires a reasonable apprehension of imminent unlawful force; it does not require the threatened force to actually be carried out. Conduct creating this genuine apprehension, such as pointing a weapon, is itself sufficient to establish the tort.
How to use it in an exam
- Key line: "In R v St George (1840), pointing a loaded firearm at another, without discharging it, was held to constitute assault, given the reasonable apprehension of imminent harm created."
- Use as the classic illustration that assault protects the apprehension itself, independent of whether the threat is actually executed.
Source
Source: (1840) 9 C&P 483
This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.
Cited in study notes
Law of TortsAssault and BatteryEstablishes that creating reasonable apprehension of imminent harm is itself sufficient for assault