Consent

Question 1

Consent

Answer 1

Consent is where someone with adequate mental capacity voluntarily gives their permission to a particular act this can be express or implied this can be seen in the case of R v Donovan where there was no battery as the other party had consented

Question 2

R v Donovan

Answer 2

D caned a 17 year old girl for the purpose of sexual gratification. This caused bruising and he was convicted of indecent assault and common assault.
D appealed on the basis that the victim had consented to the act.
His conviction was quashed.
(The original judge had misdirected the jury – it is up to the prosecution to prove that there was no consent)

Question 3

4 Exceptions to the rule on consent

Answer 3

4 Exceptions to consent

Bodily adornment – this where a person consent to lawful activity resulting in actual or serious bodily harm

Contact sports

Horseplay

Surgery

Question 4

Legal principle - Strictly speaking consent is not a defence as if other person has consented then there is no defence

Answer 4

R v Donovan (1934) The defendant caned a 17-year-old girl for the purpose of sexual gratification. This caused bruising and he was convicted of indecent assault and a common assault. The defendant appealed on the basis that the victim had consented to the act. His conviction was quashed.

R v Slingsby (1995) The defendant was charged with involuntary manslaughter by an unlawful act. He and the victim had taken part in sexual activity which was described as ‘vigorous’ but which had taken place with the victim’s consent. During this, a signet ring which he was wearing caused small cuts to the victim and this led to blood poisoning from which she died. The victim’s consent meant that there was no battery or other form of assault and so he was held to be not guilty of manslaughter as there was no unlawful act.