What is the ratio in R v Mowatt?

For s.20 GBH, the defendant need only intend or foresee that some physical harm might result, not necessarily serious or grievous bodily harm.

What did the court decide in R v Mowatt?

The Court of Appeal established that 'maliciously' in s.20 requires only foresight of some harm occurring, creating a lower mens rea threshold than s.18.

Why is R v Mowatt important for criminal law?

It clarified the mens rea distinction between s.18 and s.20 offences, establishing the fundamental principle that s.20 has a lower mental element requirement than s.18.

What is the ratio in R v Mowatt?

For s.20 GBH, the defendant need only intend or foresee that some physical harm might result, not necessarily serious or grievous bodily harm.

What did the court decide in R v Mowatt?

The Court of Appeal established that 'maliciously' in s.20 requires only foresight of some harm occurring, creating a lower mens rea threshold than s.18.

Why is R v Mowatt important for criminal law?

It clarified the mens rea distinction between s.18 and s.20 offences, establishing the fundamental principle that s.20 has a lower mental element requirement than s.18.

Criminal1 min read

R v Mowatt

[1968] 1 QB 421Court of Appeal1968

Cite this case in OSCOLA →All Criminal cases →

“Section 20 GBH requires foresight of some harm only, not serious harm specifically.”

Facts

Mowatt was involved in a fight where he struck the victim multiple times, causing serious injuries including a broken jaw. He was charged under s.20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.

Issues

What mens rea is required for unlawful wounding or inflicting grievous bodily harm under s.20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.

Held

The Court of Appeal held that for s.20, it is sufficient if the defendant intended or foresaw that some physical harm might result, albeit of a minor character.

Significance

This case is fundamental for understanding the mens rea requirements for non-fatal offences, establishing the lower threshold for s.20 compared to s.18. It's essential for students studying the hierarchy of assault offences and their mental elements.

Read the full brief — free

You're reading the free summary of R v Mowatt. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.

Create free account Already have one? Sign in

No card required. Free forever.

OSCOLA Citation

R v Mowatt [1968] 1 QB 421

Criminal LawGrievous Bodily HarmMens ReaMaliciouslySection 20

Read the full judgment elsewhere

Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.

LLBGDL

More Criminal cases

R v Reece Martin Kelly

[2026] EWCA Crim 268

R v Richard Alexander Welsh

[2026] EWCA Crim 466

R v Robert Michael Thomas

[2026] EWCA Crim 305

This case is reproduced verbatim from the public judgment published by The National Archives under the UK Government's Open Government Licence v3.0. If you appear in this case and believe it should not be published — for example because your conviction was quashed on appeal, you have statutory anonymity, or for other privacy reasons — request removal here.