consent

• consent is never a defence to murder (pretty)
• consent is strictly speaking not a defence as where the other person consents there is not an offence (donovan)
• consent must be real not fraudulent (tabassum)
• if d has not lied about who they are and qualifications it may not be fraud (richardson)
• there is a difference between true consent and mere submission (olugboja)
• consent must be valid, person must be capable and of age to consent and appreciate nature of the act (burrell)
• consent must be informed, victim must understand risks involved (dica)
• the courts can imply consent to minor touching, everyday jostlings and situations (wilson v pringle)
• defence can be raised to s47 or s20 in certain circumstances
• include surgery, body piercings, tattooing and branding (wilson)
• horseplay (jones)(aitken)
• properly conducted sports (barnes)
• dangerous exhibitions
• defence can never be raised to street fighting (ags ref no6) not deemed in public interest to do so
• can never be raised as a defence for sado masochistic acts (brown)
• extreme body modifications (dr evil)
• children under 16 can consent to medical treatment if gillick competent meaning sufficient maturity and understanding (gillick v west norfolk)
• reasonable and lawful chastisement (corporal punishment) of children is lawful if reasonable and proportionate in the circumstances, involving no cruelty
• if medical staff acting in patients best interests the absence of consent would not be unlawful for mentally incapacitated patients (f v west berkshire fa)