Regina v Kirk; Regina v Russell: CACD 31 May 2002

The defendants appealed convictions for unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl under 16. They claimed that the availability to a defendant under 23 of a special defence which was not available to them because of their own age was discriminatory.
Held: the absence of the defence was not discriminatory. A similar defence was available to a female defendant, and she would be in the same position if she was charged with unlawful sexual intercourse as an aider or abettor. It was neither unreasonable nor disproportionate that once on reaching the age of 24 the defence became unavailable. Some element of arbitrariness was inescapable.

Lord Justice Judge, Mr Justice Hunt and Mr Justice Keith
Times 26-Jun-2002, Gazette 01-Aug-2002
Sexual Offences Act 1956 6(1) 6(3), European Convention on Human Rights 6 14
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedE v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 1-Feb-2005
The defendant appealed against his conviction for having unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl under 16. He was himself under 16, and complained that the section turned the girl into a victim and him into an offender and that this was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 23 December 2021; Ref: scu.174084