consent

Question 1

consent

Answer 1

where ‘‘someone with adequate mental capacity voluntarily gives their permission to a particular act- this can be express or implied’’

Question 2

R v Donovan

Answer 2

no battery as individual consented.
D caned 17yr old girl for purposes of sexual gratification and caused bruising

Question 3

R v Slingsby

Answer 3

D and V took part in consensual activity- signet ring caused small cuts which led to blood poisoning and the V died.
not guilt of manslaughter as there was held to be no unlawful act

Question 4

not consent to

Answer 4

an activity that is intended or likely to cause s.47 ABH, 20 or 18 GBH OAPA injuries

Question 5

R v Brown

Answer 5

Ds took part in consensual homosexual sadomasochism
couldn’t use defence as injuries amount to s.47 and s.20 offences

Question 6

R v Wilson

Answer 6

it was decided that where D branded his wife with a hot knife and she had to seek medical attention that this was regarded as ‘‘personal’’ adornment like a tattoo

Question 7

R v BM

Answer 7

removed ears, nipples and split tongues etc.(body modification) as a job where clients consented but was convicted of wounding with intent to do GBH

Question 8

consent must be genuine

Answer 8

the fact that V appears to consent may not be sufficient
V cannot be deceived

Question 9

R v Dica

Answer 9

V consented to sex but didn’t know D was HIV positive so consent wasn’t valid - she had not consented to being infected with HIV

Question 10

R v Tabassum

Answer 10

D pretended to be medically qualified so he had the opportunity to examine women’s breasts, he claimed they’d consented.
only consented because they were misled - fraud vitiated the consent

Question 11

R v Richardson

Answer 11

D was a suspended dentist who’s till carried on treating patients.
consent accepted in this case as he still had the qualifications just wasn’t meant to use them

Question 12

R v Melin

Answer 12

D injected what was said to be botox into two people. after second injection bot suffered serious harm
deception of identity- capable of vitiating consent

Question 13

implied consent

Answer 13

court imply consent to minor touchings which could otherwise be battery
>contact sports
>consent to minor injuries
>medical procedure
>mistaken belief

Question 14

R v Moss

Answer 14

D was a rugby player and during a match punched an opposing player. convicted of s.20 OAPA
court; rugby is a contact sport,’‘not a licence for thuggery’’

Question 15

R v Barnes

Answer 15

D inflicted serious injury during a sliding tackle.
implied consent exists where the situation is within what can reasonable be expected, as it was here

Question 16

AGs reference No.6

Answer 16

consent to minor injuries, nothing above ABH - levels of confusion
2 young men agreed to fight in the street to settle their differences, consent couldn’t be used as a defence to such action because it was not In public interest

Question 17

blaue

Answer 17

consent to medical procedures can be denied due to things such as religion

Question 18

mistaken belief

Answer 18

Where D mistakenly but genuinely believes V consented there may be a defence

Question 19

horseplay

Answer 19

rough and boisterous play which can be consented to
Aitken - deemed to be consented to

Question 20

Consent gained under duress vitiates consent

Answer 20

R v Olugboja - D intimidated V into having sex so there was no consent
if V is afraid consent is NOT rea;

Question 21

insufficient understanding

Answer 21

Age may affect understanding and so be a factor in determining genuine consent
Burell v Harmer
Ds, 12 and 13 yr old boys, consented to being tattooed - where V was unable to appreciate the nature of the act consent couldn’t truly be given