LAW OF TORT ASSAULT 
In this case, Nona was approached by Samseng on her way home after work. Samseng then threatened by pointed a gun onto her head and asked Nona to surrender her money. In order to take legal action against Samseng under assault, the issue must first be fulfilled the elements of assault.
The first element of assault is the mental state of the defendant. In this case, the defendant has the intention to commit the assault on Nona. The intention of the defendant is specific as when the defendant acted, he intended to cause apprehension of harmful or unwanted contact which is the act of pointing a gun to Nona’s head while threatened to blow off her head. This element is satisfied in a substantially certain, to a reasonable person that the act will cause result which is in this case, Nona will be shot on the head if she disobey Samseng’s order to surrender her money. This issue is contradicted with the case of Tuberville v. Savage where the court held that there would be no assault for the language used in the statement by Tuberville did not any express any intention to do harm to Savage because the Justice of Assize were in town. There is neither intent nor an act, at least, one of which being required to establish as an assault. Thus, the first element of assault is fulfilled.
The next element to be fulfilled is the effect of the plaintiff where the plaintiff must feel reasonable apprehension of immediate harm that a force will be inflicted upon him or her.
In this issue, the act committed by the defendant has resulted in reasonable apprehension of immediate harm to the plaintiff where the plaintiff has shouted for help because of the fear she faced when she was threatened by the defendant with a gun. It is considered as an assault because the plaintiff is aware of the threat of harm happened when she was pointed by a gun at her head by the defendant. This issue is similar to the case of Zanker v. Vartzokaz (1998) where the court accepted that the victim feared that
The first element of assault is the mental state of the defendant. In this case, the defendant has the intention to commit the assault on Nona. The intention of the defendant is specific as when the defendant acted, he intended to cause apprehension of harmful or unwanted contact which is the act of pointing a gun to Nona’s head while threatened to blow off her head. This element is satisfied in a substantially certain, to a reasonable person that the act will cause result which is in this case, Nona will be shot on the head if she disobey Samseng’s order to surrender her money. This issue is contradicted with the case of Tuberville v. Savage where the court held that there would be no assault for the language used in the statement by Tuberville did not any express any intention to do harm to Savage because the Justice of Assize were in town. There is neither intent nor an act, at least, one of which being required to establish as an assault. Thus, the first element of assault is fulfilled.
The next element to be fulfilled is the effect of the plaintiff where the plaintiff must feel reasonable apprehension of immediate harm that a force will be inflicted upon him or her.
In this issue, the act committed by the defendant has resulted in reasonable apprehension of immediate harm to the plaintiff where the plaintiff has shouted for help because of the fear she faced when she was threatened by the defendant with a gun. It is considered as an assault because the plaintiff is aware of the threat of harm happened when she was pointed by a gun at her head by the defendant. This issue is similar to the case of Zanker v. Vartzokaz (1998) where the court accepted that the victim feared that