3.18)Consent Flashcards
(18 cards)
Where does the defence of “Consent” come from
Common Law often used in mostly non-fatal offences
How does the General Defence for “Consent” operate
The circumstances of the crime are such that it would not be right, just or fair to punish the defendant for their actions
Define “Implied Consent”
“Ordinary Jostlings of the everyday life” Given in situations where battery may occur
Define “Express Consent”
When V agrees either verbally or in writing to a procedure that would otherwise be GBH or ABH
What is an exception to needing “Consent”
Where V is medically incapacitated, making medical staff legally allowed to perform without consent in the patient’s best interest
What is “Consent” a valid defence for
Assault and Battery
What permitted activities can someone “Consent” to the possibility of ABH or GBH
1)Contact Sports
2)Bodily Adornment
3)Horseplay
4)Surgery
What can you not “Consent” to
1) ABH, GBH (according to AG’s Ref No 6 [1980])
3) Murder
4) Assisted Suicide
What type of defence is “Consent”
Complete
What is the burden of proof for prosecution for “Consent”
To prove there was no consent given
What are the requirements of the defence of “Consent”
1) “True Consent” was given
2) The harm caused is limited to assault or battery
3) If harm led to ABH or GBH, it fell within the permitted activities
Define “True Consent”
The victim must understand the nature and quality of the act and not lack the capacity to consent or be acting under consent.
What does “AG’s Reference No 6 [1980] entail
That the defence of consent could not be used against ABH, GBH, as two teens consented to a fight, but one sustained injuries amounting to some/severe harm
What does “Collins v Willcock [1984]” entail
That implied consent is limited to everyday contact, as D failed to defend the scratching of a police officer who had taken hold of their arm whilst not arresting them
What does “R v Dica [2004] entail
That the defence of V initially consenting to sexual intercourse does not cover them unknowingly exposing themselves to STDs, as D gave V HIV
What does “R v Wilson [1997]” entail
D branded his wife at her request, V became infected, and the doctor reported to the police was held in court that it was in the public’s interest to allow individuals to consent to harm for bodily adornment
What does “R v Jones [1987]” entail
A group of boys were playing around, and V got seriously injured. It was held that consent was a defence as long as D genuinely believed it was given, even if mistaken
What does “R v Brown [2004]” entail
V was seriously injured after a late tackle from behind and D was sent off, but his conduct could only be prosecuted if it went beyond what a reasonable player can regard to have consent to and not be sufficiently grave
