S & Anor, R. v [1983] EWCA Crim 5 (05 December 1983)

S & Anor, R. v [1983] EWCA Crim 5 (05 December 1983)

The trial judge failed to direct the jury that a genuine, even if unreasonable, belief in consent is a defence to reckless rape, and incorrectly introduced an objective standard by referring to what would be obvious to an ordinary observer. The correct test is subjective, focusing on the defendant's actual belief and state of mind.

Citation
[1983] EWCA Crim 5
Parties
Appellant: Satnam; Appellant: Kewal; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 December 1983
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal allowed; convictions quashed
Legal Topics
Rape, Recklessness, 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 2 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Satnam

Appellant

Kewal

Appellant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

  1. 1 Whether a genuine though mistaken belief in consent is a defence to reckless rape
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in directing the jury that recklessness could be established if it was obvious to an ordinary observer that the victim was not consenting

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge failed to direct the jury that a genuine, even if unreasonable, belief in consent is a defence to reckless rape, and incorrectly introduced an objective standard by referring to what would be obvious to an ordinary observer. The correct test is subjective, focusing on the defendant's actual belief and state of mind.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; convictions quashed

Orders

  • Convictions for rape quashed
  • Satnam sentenced to one day's imprisonment for indecent assault, having already served substantial time