Some jurisdictions regard assault as threatened violence and not the actual violence. Thus, they treat assault and battery as separate criminal activities. In the year 2012, 54% of the serious violent criminal activities in the United States had been reported to the police. Sixty-two percent of these violent crimes were classified as aggravated assault.

How to classify the attack

In a certain incident, a customer, who was celebrating his birthday party in a restaurant, was hit in his face with a tray by an employee of the restaurant.  The customer was actually a victim of battery. Since the victim was not hurt, he could only recover the minimal amount of damages. However, things would be different if the victim got a broken nose. If you are in such a situation, consult professionals such as N.J. Preovolos Law Corporation for guidance.

How the commercial general liability (CGL) responds

Establishments usually have commercial general liability (CGL) policies. However, many people cannot tell whether CGL policy responds to claims related to assault and battery. It is important to understand that commercial general liability has no particular exclusion for such deeds. The coverage depends on the individual responsible for the battery or assault.

The CGL guarantees to pay the sum that the insured needs to pay due to property damage or bodily injury suffered by a third party. An obligation can occur out of a contract or tort. It is important to know that a tort is often the result of the negligence of the insured. For instance, if the insured acts carelessly and the third party becomes injured, the CGL pays.

If the customer is a victim of battery and/or assault and there is a proof to show the insured was liable for the deeds (did not protect the customer, allowed the argument to escalate, did not keep the area safe etc), the commercial general liability meets the requirements of the claim.

In the case reported above, the customer was physically attacked by an employee of the restaurant. This means that the restaurant was undoubtedly liable. If one does not look at the expected and intended injury exclusion well, he may think that the act is not covered by the insurance. This can be true or false depending on how the attorneys deal with the case.

No compensation for expected or intended injury

Property damage or bodily damage intended by the insured may or may not be covered by CGL. The injured can’t get compensation for the bodily injury resulting from the use of excessive force to protect the property or persons. In this case, the action is actually intentional. However, the injury which might have occurred is neither intended nor expected. With valid excuse, the defendant is not guilty of assault and battery. However, without a valid excuse, a graver punishment waits for the defendant.

Conclusion

The criminal activities categorized as assault and battery can initiate several difficult and interesting questions concerning the element of the crimes. It is, therefore, important to look at the claim keenly before filing a lawsuit.