Click the case name for better results:

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts

Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: HL 14 Oct 2004

Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant? Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: ‘The overriding concern is that a trial should be fair, and the presumption … Continue reading Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: HL 14 Oct 2004

B v Regina: CACD 31 Jan 2013

The Court was asked whether it was open to a defendant charged with rape contrary to section 1 of the 2003 Act to rely upon a ‘deluded’ belief in the consent of the complainant. Held: Hughes LJ said: ‘Both the common law and statute law are well used to a rule which judges a defendant … Continue reading B v Regina: CACD 31 Jan 2013

O’Riordan v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 19 May 2005

An offender had absconded with a child and was to be prosecuted for sex offences against her. The police circulated all the journalists who had had contact to say that an identification of the defendant would also identify the girl. The defendant here, the editor of a magazine was not so informed. She published the … Continue reading O’Riordan v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 19 May 2005

Regina v Crooks: CACD 18 Mar 2004

The defendant appealed against a conviction in 2002 for the rape of his wife in 1970. He said that at the time that was not an offence. Held: The words which at one point appeared to make rape of a wife lawful were a mere technicality. The case of R v R changed the law … Continue reading Regina v Crooks: CACD 18 Mar 2004

Brown v United Kingdom: ECHR 2 Jul 2002

Article 6(2) of the Convention was not violated by a provision which enabled a newspaper proprietor or publisher to escape strict liability under section 4(5) of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1976 only if he proved, on the balance of probabilities, that he was in no way at fault in connection with the offending publication.‘The … Continue reading Brown v United Kingdom: ECHR 2 Jul 2002

Regina v J (rape: marital exemption): Crwn 1991

(Crown Ct at Teesside) A husband was charged with having raped his wife, from whom he was living apart at the time. Held: The charge was bad. s 1(1)(a) of the 1976 Act had the effect that the marital exemption embodied in Hale’s proposition was preserved, subject to those exceptions established by cases decided before … Continue reading Regina v J (rape: marital exemption): Crwn 1991

Regina v R: HL 23 Oct 1991

H has no right to sexual intercourse with W – rape The defendant appealed against his conviction for having raped his wife, saying that intercourse with his wife was necessarily lawful, and therefore outside the statutory definition of rape. Due to the matrimonial difficulties, the wife had left their matrimonial house and gone to her … Continue reading Regina v R: HL 23 Oct 1991

Monica, Regina (on The Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 14 Dec 2018

Deception as to identity did not undermine consent The claimant had been an environmental campaigner. She had had a sexual relationship with a man who was unknown to her an undercover police officer. She now challenged the decision not to prosecute him for rape. Held: Her claim failed. Case law suggested that no prosecution had … Continue reading Monica, Regina (on The Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 14 Dec 2018