ML, R. v

ML, R. v

The trial judge complied with the obligation to direct the jury on consent and lack of reasonable belief in consent. The summing-up was balanced and adequately summarised both sides. No arguable basis exists for concluding the convictions were unsafe.

Parties
Appellant: ML; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Rape, Sexual Assault, Consent, Appeals
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Rape Sexual Assault Consent Appeals

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ML

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge adequately directed the jury on the issue of consent in sexual offences
  2. 2 Whether the summing-up was balanced between Crown and defence cases
  3. 3 Whether additional grounds of appeal demonstrate unsafe convictions

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge complied with the obligation to direct the jury on consent and lack of reasonable belief in consent. The summing-up was balanced and adequately summarised both sides. No arguable basis exists for concluding the convictions were unsafe.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • renewed application for leave to appeal on additional grounds refused