R v Tabassum (2000)

R v Tabassum (2000)

1. Key issues of the case is whether the complainants gave "genuine consent"

2. Brief summary of the facts:

   • Appellant had asked several women to take part in what he said was a breast cancer survey to enable him to prepare a database software package for sale to doctors. The three complainant women agreed to the appellant showing them how to examine their own breasts. That involved the appellant, himself, feeling the breasts of two of the women and using a stethoscope beneath the bra of the third woman. Each of the three women said that they had only consented because they thought the appellant had either medical qualifications or relevant training. He had neither. There was no evidence of any sexual motive.

3. Prosecution's argument:

   • Prosecution argued that they only consented because they thought he had medical training or qualifications, or worked for Christie's Cancer hospital, meaning there was no genuine consent.

4. Defence's argument

   • Defence argued that D had consent, and so, no indecent assault had taken place. Also argued that his lack of medical qualifications did not change the nature and quality of his act (to have their breasts examined for a database, which was exactly what the complainants had consented to).

5. Linked cases:

6. Ratio decidendi:

   • Nature and quality of the act had changed, from an examination by a medically trained professional, to something they had not consented to.
   • As stated in Clarence (1888-90) - "Consent to a surgical operation or examination is not a consent to a sexual connection or indecent behaviour."