R v BQL & Anor

R v BQL & Anor

The trial judge erred in law by failing to consider whether the independent evidence was capable of showing the complainant lacked capacity to consent, and by treating it solely as undermining the prosecution case; the ruling that neither accused had a case to answer was not reasonable and must be reversed.

Parties
Applicant: Rex; Respondent: BQL; Respondent: AKO
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 April 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Ruling of No Case to Answer
Outcome
Judge's ruling reversed; proceedings to be resumed; retrial ordered.
Legal Topics
Capacity to Consent, Intoxication, Reporting Restrictions, Submission of No Case to Answer
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Capacity to Consent Intoxication Reporting Restrictions Submission of No Case to Answer

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Applicant

BQL

Respondent

AKO

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Ruling of No Case to Answer

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in ruling there was no case to answer for the accused on charges of kidnapping, rape, assault by penetration, and sexual assault
  2. 2 Whether evidence of intoxication and actions of the complainant could support a finding of lack of capacity to consent
  3. 3 Whether the judge properly applied the legal test for submission of no case to answer

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge erred in law by failing to consider whether the independent evidence was capable of showing the complainant lacked capacity to consent, and by treating it solely as undermining the prosecution case; the ruling that neither accused had a case to answer was not reasonable and must be reversed.

Court Disposition

Judge's ruling reversed; proceedings to be resumed; retrial ordered.

Orders

  • Trial to be restarted before a different judge at a different Crown Court centre.
  • Case to be listed as soon as possible to mention and fix trial date.