1. The least touching of another in anger is a battery.
Cole v. Turner 1704
Participation in a dangerous activity is not enough: Fowler v. Lanning 1959 - shooting party; it could not be established that the fatal shot came from the defendant's gun.

2. Defences
a) Doctors do not have to give information about all the risks: Chatterton v. Gerson 1980 - a woman having an operation which even worsened the disease.
b) Police officers have say so when they make an arrest: Collins v. Wilcock 1984 - a woman scratching a bobby who took her arm in pursuance to an arrest - battery on part of the policeman.
But saying 'I want to talk to you' if an suspect is to stay for questioning is enough: Donnely v. Jackson 1970
c) Necessity: Leigh v. Gladstone 1909 - a prisoner on hunger strike was forcibly fed by warders. No battery.
d) Sports: If the injuries are outside the rules of the game, there is battery: Lewis v. Brookshaw 1970 - soccer.

3. Intention
a) In the beginnig, intention was essential: Weaver v. Ward 1616 - military exercises with loaded weapons.
b) Later, negligence seemed to suffice: Stainley v. Powell 1891 - claim dismissed for failure to establish negli- gence (Shooting party).
c) But with the tort of negligence availabe, battery is now again restricted to intentional acts:
Letang v. Cooper 1965 - car driving over a woman's legs; negligence, no battery. Per-se torts favour the plaintiff, because they henceforth have not to show damages. But he must show that it is such a tort.

4. Hostility
a) It is open if that is necessary: Wilson v. Pringle 1986 - boy attacked in school; the question whether there was horse-play or hostile battery had to be decided by the given situation.
b) But this is doubtful: Re F. (?) 1990 (a following case anyway) - obtiter: doubt whether the decision in Wilson v. Pringle 1986 was right. If you say there has to be hostility you do not save people enough from being touched.
Judge Cardozo: you should not be touched by anyone if you do not consent.
Sport: are you injured in the rules of the game or are you injured because someone wants you to?

6. Where there is nervous shock caused by threat, this will be brought under the Wilkinson v. Downtown 1897 principle (tort of intentional injury): Khorasandjian v. Bush 1993 - case in nuisance.