Consent CASES
In English law, consent refers to the voluntary agreement or permission given by a party, which can significantly affect the legality of actions and the enforceability of agreements.
Definition and principles
Consent must be informed, voluntary, and given freely without coercion, duress, or misrepresentation. Genuine consent is vital to the validity of contracts and certain defences in tort and criminal law.
Factors affecting genuine consent
- Duress: Consent obtained by threats or unlawful pressure is invalid.
- Undue influence: Exploiting a relationship of trust or dependency invalidates consent.
- Misrepresentation: False statements inducing consent can render it voidable.
- Mistake: Fundamental errors can undermine the reality of consent.
Case example: Barton v Armstrong (1973)
In Barton v Armstrong, the Privy Council ruled that consent to a contract is invalid if procured by threats or duress. Even if threats weren’t the sole reason for agreement, their presence sufficiently taints consent, making the contract voidable.
Legal effects of invalid consent
Invalid consent can lead to void or voidable contracts, allowing the affected party to rescind the agreement, claim damages, or seek other remedies depending on circumstances.
Practical importance
Consent remains critical in transactions, contracts, and legal defences, requiring parties to ensure clarity, fairness, and transparency in obtaining and recording consent.
Home » Consent
A husband was convicted of attempted rape upon his wife after forcing entry into her parents' home where she had been living following their separation. The House of Lords abolished the common law marital exemption from rape, holding that marriage no longer implies irrevocable consent to sexual intercourse. Facts The...
Conjoined twins Jodie and Mary could be surgically separated only by causing Mary’s inevitable death, but non-separation meant both would soon die. Their devout Catholic parents refused consent. The Court of Appeal held the operation was in Jodie’s best interests and, applying necessity, could lawfully proceed. Facts Jodie and Mary...
Mrs Gillick challenged DHSS guidance allowing doctors to provide contraceptive advice and treatment to girls under 16 without parental consent. The House of Lords held that parental rights yield when a child achieves sufficient understanding and intelligence to make their own decisions about medical treatment, establishing the 'Gillick competence' test....
F, a 36-year-old woman with severe mental disability, was a voluntary hospital patient who formed a sexual relationship with a male patient. Due to her inability to consent to or cope with pregnancy, the court was asked whether sterilisation could lawfully be performed without her consent. The House of Lords...
Five men engaged in consensual sadomasochistic homosexual activities were convicted of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and wounding. The House of Lords held that consent is no defence to charges under sections 20 and 47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 where actual bodily harm is deliberately inflicted,...
Mrs Pitt was induced by her husband's actual undue influence to charge their jointly-owned home to secure a loan ostensibly for a holiday home, but actually used by Mr Pitt for share speculation. The House of Lords held that manifest disadvantage need not be proved in cases of actual undue...