Bree, R v

Bree, R v

The conviction was unsafe because the jury were not given sufficient directions on the meaning of capacity to consent in the context of voluntary intoxication, nor guidance on how to assess the complainant's ability to consent given the facts and the prosecution's changed case; the statutory definition of consent requires both freedom and capacity, and capacity may be lost before unconsciousness, but the jury was not properly assisted to apply these principles.

Parties
Prosecutor: R; Appellant: Benjamin Bree
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Rape, Consent, Intoxication, Sexual Offences
Criminal Law Rape Consent Intoxication Sexual Offences

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 6 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Prosecutor

Benjamin Bree

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Effect of voluntary intoxication on capacity to consent to sexual intercourse under the Sexual Offences Act 2003
  2. 2 Adequacy of jury directions regarding consent and intoxication

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was unsafe because the jury were not given sufficient directions on the meaning of capacity to consent in the context of voluntary intoxication, nor guidance on how to assess the complainant's ability to consent given the facts and the prosecution's changed case; the statutory definition of consent requires both freedom and capacity, and capacity may be lost before unconsciousness, but the jury was not properly assisted to apply these principles.

Court Disposition

conviction quashed

Orders

  • conviction quashed