Quarless v Francis

• Jurisdiction: Barbados
• Judge: Williams, J.
• Judgment Date: 12 January 1983
• Neutral Citation: BB 1983 HC 1
• Docket Number: No. 555 of 1981
• Court: High Court (Barbados)
• Date: 12 January 1983

High Court. (Civil Jurisdiction)

Williams, P.J.

No. 555 of 1981

Quarless

and

Francis

Appearances:

Mr. C.A. Phillips, Q.C., of Messrs. Fields & Phillips for the plaintiff.

Mr. E.D. Mottley, Q.C., for the defendant.

Tort - Damages — Assault

Williams, J.

1 This is an action for damages for assault. Before dealing with the substance I will dispose of a submission made by counsel for the defendant. It is that the statement of claim discloses no cause of action, it not being alleged that the assault was intentional or negligent.

2 The following passage appears at page 224 of Bullen and Leake and Jacob's Precedents of Pleading, Twelfth Edition.

“In an action for damages for assault or for assault and battery, i.e. an intentional trespass to the person, the Statement of Claim must allege that the act or conduct complained of was intentional, otherwise it will not disclose a cause of action see Fowler v. Lanning [1959] 1 Q.B. 426). If the act or conduct speaks for itself as being plainly the word “intentional”, but otherwise the intention to do the intentional willful or deliberate, e.g. hitting a person with the fists, it may be permissible to omit act or conduct complained of must be expressly pleaded.”

3 In this case paragraph 3 of the statement of claim as amended with the consent of the defendant reads as follows: –

“3. On the 20th day of May, 1981 at the said Queen Elizabeth Hospital the defendant assaulted the plaintiff whilst in the execution of her duty by approaching her in a threatening manner, pushing his finger in her face and forcing her to lean backwards on her stool so as to avoid injury to her face.”

4 The conduct alleged against the defendant in this paragraph is plainly willful and deliberate and in my opinion the statement of claim cannot be validly challenged as not disclosing a cause of action in assault.

5 Turning to matters of substance, the evidence for the plaintiff is that on the 20th of May 1981 the plaintiff, senior theatre sister at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, was on duty at the central information desk which is positioned just outside the corridor leading to the operating rooms in the theatre. She was having a discussion with other nurses. It was about lunch time, 12:30 to 12:45 p.m., and the defendant, senior registrar in the department of surgery passed by the desk and went to the door leading into the theatre corridor. He had in his hand a bag in which items of food could be seen and she asked him where he was taking the bag. For, as she explained, she was responsible for a clean and aseptic atmosphere in the operating rooms and meals therein were forbidden. The story can be continued in her words –

“He turned back and came to me. He started to walk a bit quickly. He approached me. I can't remember what he said because he had formed fist and finger pointing at my nose. I tried to go back to avoid his finger. I became very...