1B - Defences - Consent - Case List

Question 1

Donovan

Answer 1

where the other person consents to being touched, there is no battery as there is no unlawful force

Question 2

Slingsby

Answer 2

V’s consent meant no battery or other form of assault and so D was not guilty of manslaughter as there was no unlawful act

Question 3

Tabussum

Answer 3

The act consented to is not the act done. Consent to a surgical operation/examination isn’t consent to sexual connection or indecent behaviour

Question 4

Oluboja

Answer 4

Fact that V submits to D’s conduct through fear shows the consent is not real. CoA held that there is a difference between real consent and submission

Question 5

Dica

Answer 5

Consent to unprotected sex but to the risk of infection of HIV

Question 6

Barnes

Answer 6

where an injury caused during a match, then a criminal prosecution, should be reserved for situations where conduct was sufficiently grave

Question 7

Brown

Answer 7

Consent wasn’t a defence to sadomasochistic acts done in private by homosexuals despite all being adults and injuries caused didn’t require medical attention

Question 8

Jones

Answer 8

Horseplay so is thus an exception

Question 9

Aitken

Answer 9

mistaken belief of V’s consent, should have been left to the jury

Question 10

Wilson and Pringle

Answer 10

ordinary ‘jostlings’ of everyday life weren’t battery which includes a hand being seized in friendship at a party or a back being slapped within reason

Question 11

Emmett

Answer 11

consent to injuries wouldn’t be a defence where harm caused is more than transient or trivial injury

Question 12

R (on application of Pretty) v DPP

Answer 12

HOL refused any assistance to complete euthanasia (by husband) would be a criminal act

Question 13

R (on application of Nicklinson and another) v Ministry of Justice

Answer 13

HOL refused any assistance to complete euthanasia (by a doctor) would be a criminal act. In order for a Dr to be a part of euthanasia, Parliament would have to change the law

Question 14

Konzani

Answer 14

D knowingly concealed his condition so V’s couldn’t give proper consent as they were not properly informed

Question 15

R v Clarence

Answer 15

husband, unknown to wife, had a venereal disease and the wife was infected when they had sex. Held that the wife consent to sexual intercourse meant there was no assault and thus no offence

Question 16

R v Golding

Answer 16

herpes may be added to the list of communicable diseases considered sufficiently serious to mean serious harm

Question 17

AG’s Ref No 6 1980

Answer 17

• gave public policy exceptions
• ‘it is not in the public interest that people should try to cause, or should cause, each other harm for no good’
• consent is not a defence to street fights there where exceptions where consent was a defence

Question 18

R v Wilson

Answer 18

Branding was akin to tattooing and was thus bodily adornment so consent was allowed as a defence