R v Labrosse (SCA CR 12/2023) [2024] ((Arising in CR 60/2021) (3 May 2024)) [2024] SCCA 15 (3 May 2024)

R v Labrosse (SCA CR 12/2023) [2024] ((Arising in CR 60/2021) (3 May 2024)) [2024] SCCA 15 (3 May 2024)

The mens rea for sexual assault under section 130 requires both intention to commit the act and knowledge that the victim does not consent. Section 130(3)(c) creates a rebuttable presumption regarding incapacity to consent, with the burden on the prosecution to prove incapacity. A forensic psychologist’s report is...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2024] SCCA 15
Parties
Applicant: Attorney General; Respondent: Labrosse
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
3 May 2024
Case Number
(Arising in CR 60/2021) (3 May 2024)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Reference / Reference on Point of Law After Acquittal
Outcome
Reference answered; opinion given on points of law; no effect on acquittal.
Legal Topics
Sexual Assault, Mens Rea, Consent, Expert Evidence, Forensic Psychology
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Evidence Sexual Assault Mens Rea Consent Expert Evidence Forensic Psychology

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General

Applicant

Labrosse

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Reference / Reference on Point of Law After Acquittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the correct mens rea elements for sexual assault under section 130(1) and (2)(d) of the Penal Code were identified
  2. 2 Whether section 130(3)(c) requires proof of the accused's knowledge of incapacity to consent
  3. 3 Sufficiency and probative value of a forensic psychologist’s report in determining incapacity to consent

Ratio Decidendi

The mens rea for sexual assault under section 130 requires both intention to commit the act and knowledge that the victim does not consent. Section 130(3)(c) creates a rebuttable presumption regarding incapacity to consent, with the burden on the prosecution to prove incapacity. A forensic psychologist’s report is admissible and corroborative but not conclusive; the judge must independently assess all evidence to determine incapacity to consent.

Court Disposition

Reference answered; opinion given on points of law; no effect on acquittal.