Olugboja, R. v [1981] EWCA Crim 2 (17 June 1981)

Olugboja, R. v [1981] EWCA Crim 2 (17 June 1981)

It is not necessary for the prosecution to prove that consent was vitiated by force, fear, or fraud; it is sufficient to prove that the victim did not consent at the time of intercourse. The judge's directions, though not ideal in wording, were not a misdirection in law.

Citation
[1981] EWCA Crim 2
Parties
Appellant: Appellant (unnamed Nigerian student); Respondent: Crown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 June 1981
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Rape, Consent, Sexual Offences, Jury Directions
Criminal Law Rape Consent Sexual Offences Jury Directions

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appellant (unnamed Nigerian student)

Appellant

Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether for rape, consent must be vitiated by force, fear of force, or fraud, or if mere lack of consent suffices under the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1976.

Ratio Decidendi

It is not necessary for the prosecution to prove that consent was vitiated by force, fear, or fraud; it is sufficient to prove that the victim did not consent at the time of intercourse. The judge's directions, though not ideal in wording, were not a misdirection in law.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Conviction for rape upheld
  • Leave to appeal to House of Lords refused