Revolutionise your case law training with
BACK TO CASE LAW SELECTIONR v Tabussum (2000)R v Dica (2004)R v Donovan (1934)Attorney-General's reference (No 6 of 1980)R v Brown (1993)R v Wilson (1996)R v Jones and others (1986)
Three women were preparing a database in relation to breast cancer. They thought the defendant was medically qualified or trained and allowed him to touch their breasts. The defendant was not medically trained and even though the women consented to this,
Two women had a relationship with the defendant and had unprotected sex. They became infected with HIV. The defendant knew he was HIV positive but did not tell the two women this fact. The women claimed that if they had known they would never have unprote
The defendant was convicted of indecent assault and common assault after caning a 17 year old girl for his sexual gratification. The girl was bruised. The defendant appealed as he claimed the girl had consented to this. His conviction was quashed.
Two men agreed to settle their quarrel by having a fight in the street. One suffered a bleeding nose and bruising.
There were five adult men who were all consenting sado-masochists. They were convicted of offences of assault causing actual bodily harm (s 47 Offences Against the Person Act 1861) and malicious wounding (s 20 Offences Against the Person Act 1861). The ac
A wife requested her husband to brand his initials on her buttocks with a heated butter knife. The wife’s burns became infected and needed medical treatment. The husband was convicted of assault causing actual bodily harm (s47 Offences Against the Perso
The defendants who were older boys tossed two boys aged 14 and 15 the victims into the air. One of the victims suffered a broken arm and the other a ruptured spleen. The convictions were quashed because the judge did not allow the issue of mistaken belie
Your Are Correct !
Your Are Incorrect !