Search results
R v R. R v R [1991] UKHL 12 [a] is a decision in which the House of Lords determined that under English criminal law, it is a crime for a husband to rape his wife. In 1990, the defendant, referred to in the judgment only as R to protect the identity of the victim, had been convicted of attempting to rape his wife.
- Facts
- Issues
- Decision/Outcome
The defendant married his wife (complainant) in August 1984. After the marriage did not work, she moved out in October 1989 and took her son to live with her parents. At the time of the incident in November 1989, they were separated but not legally divorced. The defendant broke in to her parents’ home and attempted to have sexual intercourse with t...
The defendant appealed his conviction on the issues of attempted rape and consent against s1(1) of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1976. He argued on the grounds of the marital rape exemption that existed under the common law of England and the principle that a husband could not rape his wife, as the contract of marriage gave irrevocable consen...
The court upheld his conviction for attempted rape. There was no marital rape exception under English law and this was a ‘common law fiction’ that existed. The concept of irrevocable consent of a wife to her husband was classed as unacceptable concept in modern times; each is seen as equal partners in a marriage. The relationship between the partie...
Summary. The landmark case of R v R (1991) removed the legal exemption for rape in marriage in England and Wales. The case involved a husband who was accused of raping his wife, to which he argued that it was not possible for a husband to rape his wife as their sexual relations were consensual by nature.
Jan 4, 2024 · FACTS. R (‘Husband’) and Victim (‘Wife’) were married in 1984 but separated in October 1989 when the Wife left the marital home with their child and sought refuge at her parents' home. After their separation, the Husband communicated his intention to pursue a divorce.
R v R [1991] 3 WLR 767 House of Lords. The defendant was charged with the attempted rape of his wife. At the time of the offence the couple had separated although no formal legal separation existed and neither party had partitioned for a divorce. Held: The House of Lords overturned the matrimonial exception to rape.
Oct 23, 1991 · The case highlighted the evolving legal landscape concerning consent, marriage, and sexual offenses, ultimately rejecting the historical notion of implied consent within marital relationships. Click here to read the full judgment. Get free access to the complete judgment in R v R on CaseMine.
R. v. R. The defendant appeals his conviction for attempted rape on the grounds that a husband cannot rape his wife.
