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 in 1991. Even at 1970, the defendant would have been advised by a competent lawyer that the law might change, and that it might in any event be unlawful in other ways, and have other civil consequences. The husband’s right to a fair trial was met by the wife’s right not to be subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment. Appeal rejected.
Judges:
Judge LJ, Nelson, McCombe JJ
Citations:
Times 25-Mar-2004
Statutes:
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1976, European Convention on Human Rights 7.1 7.2
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – 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 . .
Not fully informed – SW v The United Kingdom; CR v United Kingdom ECHR 22-Nov-1995
Criminal Law Change not retrospective
The law that marital rape was an offence, was not to be treated as retrospective despite being a common law change. The Court rejected complaints by two applicants who had been found guilty of raping their wives which was an undoubted extension of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime, Human Rights
Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.194882
