Home > Preview
The flashcards below were created by user
on FreezingBlue Flashcards.
R v R
- rejected marriage rape immunity as a defence
- marital rape could not be prosecuted till 1991
indicative of the slowness of the law to intervene to protect women from sexual assault
(re: CR v UK)
CR v UK
- re: R v R
- ECtHR rejected the argument that R v R was retrospective law making, since court decisions were gradually cutting away and qualifying marital rape immunity
- natural progression of the law
R v Williams
- Singing teacher persuaded pupil to have sex to improve her breathing
- - was a deception as to the purpose of the act
- - vitiated consent under section 76(2)(a)
R v EB
- appellant failed to disclose HIV status before sexual penetration
- - still sufficient consent, since he did not deceive her as to the nature and purpose of the act
- - didnt get HIV, otherwise GBH (R v Dica)
- - but will not have any defence to any charge which may result from harm created by that sexual activity, such as consent to infection by the disease
- other questions:
- - Should deceptions include implied deceiptions?
- - But the act of non-disclosure should be prosecuted by tailormade charges of deception in relation to the particular sexual activity, not prosecuted under rape
R v Jheeta
- D pretended to be several policemen and sent a lot of text messages to the V, telling her to have sex with D or pay a fine for causing him distress.
- - conclusive presumptions don't apply--> not deception as to the nature/purpose of the act
What would you like to do?
Home > Flashcards > Print Preview