• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Offences Against the Person. Case note regarding R. v Brown [1994] 1 A.C. 212.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

´╗┐Case note regarding R. v Brown [1994] 1 A.C. 212. Fatima Gurbanova 1103134 IA120 Audrey Woraker The sado-masochist group which ?willingly and enthusiastically?[1] applied violence upon each other in order to receive a sexual pleasure was held guilty under sections ?20 and 47 the Offences against Person Act 1861?[2]. Section 20 of the Offences against person act 1861 states: ?Whosoever shall unlawfully and maliciously wound or inflict any grievous bodily harm upon any other person, either with or without weapon or instrument, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and being convicted thereof shall be liable to be kept in penal servitude?[3], section 47 states: ?Whosoever shall be convicted upon an indictment of any assault occasioning actual bodily harm will be liable to be kept in penal servitude?[4]. Appellants being unsatisfied with the sentence of the court applied for appeal arguing that the act under which they were sentenced is inappropriate in the given conditions. The appellants were experiencing their sado-masochistic exercises on private property, without involving ?children, young persons (except for K. who was limited in contact) or animals?[5]. Their activities were not intended to be shown to public, and the tapes with their activities were intended only to be shown among the members of the group. ...read more.

Middle

home and his correspondence?[16] in their appeals, however Lord Lowry disagreed with this refer saying that the article 8 of the Convention is not a part of the English Law and links to the article 8 (2) of the Convention that states that ?no public authority can be said to have interfered with a right by enforcing the provisions of the Act 1861?[17]. In present case ?at least actual bodily harm?[18] was committed; therefore private life is no longer a right in given circumstances. Nonetheless, Lord Mustill in his decision defined the current case as nothing but the ?private sexual relations?[19] which is not a problem of the criminal law. The interesting point that was showed by Lord Mustill is that there are no suitable cases and no appropriate statutes to this case. ?The indictment was made only because no other statute was found which could conceivably be brought to bear upon them?[20]. Lord Slynn Hadley in his conclusion stated: ?adults can consent to acts done in private which do not result serious bodily harm?[21] and continues saying that therefore the present case cannot be classified as one of the cases that can be sentenced under the Offences Against Person Act 1861. ...read more.

Conclusion

Overall, the court dismissed the appeal because the majority of the Lords held that the group of sado-masochists was applying violence on each other and their acts were unlawful. However, two other Lords (Lord Mustill and Lord Slynn Hadley) expressed the opposite opinion which was not without certain basis. The acts were committed in private, without any enforcement, all the participants were adults, able to understand what they were enacted. The injuries that the appellants had were not serious enough, and the actions that they were doing did not result any crucial consequence. The Offences against Person Act was established in order to punish the cases that include violence and enforcement, which are absent in the current case. It is seen from the Lord?s judgments that the main base for the Lords who dismissed the appeal was the disgust to the amoral activities enacted by the appellants; therefore the decision can be called a prejudice. Yes, the acts that were done by the appellants were perverted, and hardly can be called normal, but however they did not affect anyone except themselves and they were not against this; on the contrary they showed will to experience all the injuries that they had. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Jurisprudence section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Jurisprudence essays

  1. Unlawful Act Manslaughter

    But in this section we are concerned more about the bottom point - is the killing sufficiently blameworthy to attract liability for manslaughter, for a lesser offence or indeed no liability at all? It is sensible to regard manslaughter not as a single offence but as separate offences.

  2. Universal conceptions of human rights should supersede culturally relative conceptions. Discuss. Assess the effectiveness ...

    if they have to be cut open, for some women, intercourse remains painful. Even when this is not the case, the importance of the clitoris in experiencing sexual pleasure and orgasm suggests that mutilation involving partial or complete clitoridectomy would adversely affect sexual fulfillment.

  1. Perhaps the most pertinent issue regarding the justification of torture is the ongoing and ...

    The sheer number of those arrested and detained since the beginning of the 'war on terror' that have been released due to lack of evidence is testament to this.6 In assuming that the person detained is undoubtedly a terrorist is vastly different from reality, and moreover, if enough evidence exists

  2. Section 1(1) of the Theft Act 1968 provides that 'a person is guilty of ...

    According to R v Ghosh [1982] QB 1053, Angela will be dishonest if '...according to the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people what was done was dishonest. If it was not dishonest by those standards, that is the end of the matter and the prosecution fails.

  1. Essay on how judges decide cases

    that which constitutes 'the criteria for the identification of the laws which courts have to apply'.13 The rule of recognition expresses, or symbolises the basic tenet of legal positivism. It states that there are conventional criteria, agreed upon by officials, for determining which rules are and which are not part

  2. Non Violence and Black Power: How differing conceptions of power led to the transition ...

    CORE's NVDA programme "became a model for increased and effective efforts at the lowering of barriers to Negroes in all forms of public accommodation...in housing and...employment" (N.Wright Jr,1967,p.123), one which was extensively used in the late 1950's and early 1960's.

  1. Protecting Human Rights in the UK - Case notes: Bellinger v Bellinger (Lord Chancellor ...

    As stated in Goodwin "A test of congruent biological factors can no longer be decisive in denying legal recognition."5 Mrs Bellinger successfully claimed that s11 (c) of the Matrimonial Causes Act was incompatible with 2 articles of the European Convention on Human Rights.

  2. Libertarian Welfare Rights. An Inquiry into the Coherence of Some Common Libertarian Commitments

    Nozick allows that consent can justify non-minimal states. He insists only that minimal states do not require free consent for legitimacy. For, he believes the minimal states only enforce pre-existing rights. At the same time, Nozick might maintain that other, more robust, states would require free consent.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work