Which statement correctly defines battery in tort law?

In tort law, battery is defined as an intentional act by the defendant that results in harmful or offensive contact with the plaintiff. The key element here is the intent; the defendant must have the purpose of causing contact or must know with substantial certainty that such contact will occur. This means that even if the harm is unintentional or if the contact does not lead to significant injury, the defendant can still be held liable for battery as long as they intended to make contact that might be considered harmful or offensive.

The definition captures the essence of personal autonomy and consent; individuals should have the right to control what happens to their bodies. Thus, the requirement for intent is essential, distinguishing battery from other torts such as negligence, which does not require intent to cause harm.

In contrast, other statements do not accurately capture the necessary elements of battery. For example, the idea that the defendant must cause harm accidentally misunderstands the nature of battery since intent is required. Similarly, a clear request from the plaintiff does not pertain to the definition of battery, nor does the requirement that the plaintiff be aware of the contact at the time it happens, although awareness can affect the plaintiff's ability to claim damages. These components diverge from the foundational intent principle that defines