Flashcards
A2 Law: Defence of Consent
Cards in this deck (23)
- 1Case Facts: Euthanasia won't make the defence available - Pretty v DPP (2002)The defendant had motor neurone disease and wanted her husband to be able to assist her suicide. She took her case to the ECHR, claiming it was against her human rights to not allow the defence (Articles 2,3,8,9)
- 2Case Outcome: Euthanasia won't make the defence available - Pretty v DPP (2002)The ECHR dismissed her appeal on all counts.
- 3Cases Facts: Real consent must be given - Burrel v Harmer (1967)The defendant tattooed two boys aged 12 and 13. Their tattoo's became inflamed.
- 4Cases Outcome: Real consent must be given - Burrel v Harmer (1967)The defendant was convicted of ABH. He tried to argue they had gave consent but the Divisional Court held there was no consent as they weren't old enough to appreciate nor understand the nature of the act.
- 5Case Facts: Consent obtained by fraud by deceiving the identity of their person - Richardson (1998)The defendant was a dentist and was suspended from practicing but she continued to treat her patients.
- 6Case Outcome: Consent obtained by fraud by deceiving the identity of their person - Richardson (1998)She was convicted of ABH as her patients wouldn't have given their consent if they had knew she was suspended. Her appeal was allowed, however, as she hadn't deceived them in any other way apart from she was no longer qualified.
- 7Case Facts: Consent obtained by fraud by deceiving the nature and quality of the defendant's act - Tabassum (2000)The defendant claimed he was doing medical research and examined woman's breasts. He was actually doing it for his own enjoyment.
- 8Case Outcome: Consent obtained by fraud by deceiving the nature and quality of the defendant's act - Tabassum (2000)He argued that they had consented but his conviction under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 was upheld. The women consented towards medical research; they had been deceived as to the "quality" of the act.
- 9Case Facts: Consent must be informed - Dica (2004)The defendant had consensual sex with two women. He was HIV positive and didn't tell them.
- 10Case Outcome: Consent must be informed - Dica (2004)The court held that consenting to sex didn't mean automatic consent to any incidental risk of injury or infection. He was convicted under s20 GBH.
- 11Case Outcome: Contact Sports - Barnes (2004)The defendant was convicted of s20 GBH as he had tackled his opponent recklessly and unnecessarily. His appeal was allowed as the COA said a defendant's conduct should be sufficiently grave to be properly categorised as criminal. Lord Woolf said sport impliedly consents to the risk of harm anyway. Factors to be considered in these cases would be; the type of sport, the level it is played at, the nature of the act and the degree of force used.
- 12Case Facts: Horseplay - Jones and Others (1987)The victims was being thrown in the air by his schoolmates and suffered from a ruptured spleen and a broken arm.
- 13Case Outcome: Horseplay - Jones and Others (1987)The defence was allowed, even though the consent was mistaken.
- 14Case Facts: Horseplay - Aitken and Others (1992)The victim and defendant's were RAF officers. During an initiation ceremony, the defendant's set fire to the victim's fire resistant suit. He was severely burned.
- 15Case Outcome: Horseplay - Aitken and Others (1992)The defence was allowed and their convictions were quashed.
- 16Case Facts: Tattooing and Branding - Wilson (1997)The defendant branded his wife's bottom with a hot butter knife.
- 17Case Outcome: Tattooing and Branding - Wilson (1997)His convicted was quashed as she had consented and branding was very similar to a tattoo.
- 18Case Facts: Sexual Activity - Slingsby (1995)The defendant and the victim had consensual sex. He accidentally scratched her with his signet ring, which caused internal bleeding and she later died.
- 19Case Outcome: Sexual Activity - Slingsby (1995)The Court held that there was no assault as the victim had consented. The defendant was not found guilty of unlawful act manslaughter.
- 20Case Facts: Sexual Activity - Brown (1994)The defendants were a group of homosexuals who took part in acts of violence against each other for sexual pleasure over a 10 year period. All participants had given consent and no one complained to the police or sought medical attention. The police accidentally discovered the activities.
- 21Case Outcome: Sexual Activity - Brown (1994)They were all charged with offences under the Offences Against the Persons Act 1861. Their appeals were rejected by the COA and the HOL. The courts do not accept consent when injury is caused during sado-masochism.
- 22Case Facts: Sexual Activity - Emmett (1999)During sex, the defendant suffocated his wife with a plastic bag causing internal bleeding in her eyes and poured lighter fluid on her breasts causing her serious burns.
- 23Case Outcome: Sexual Activity - Emmett (1999)He was convicted of ABH even though she had consented.
Information
- Description
- A Levels Law A2 (Cases) Flashcards on A2 Law: Defence of Consent , created by Jessica 'JessieB on 29/04/2014.
- Created by
- Jessica 'JessieB
- Views
- 981
- Tags
- Rating