What is the ratio in R v R?

The common law exemption preventing husbands from being convicted of raping their wives no longer exists. Marriage does not constitute ongoing consent to sexual intercourse.

What did the court decide in R v R?

The House of Lords abolished the marital rape exemption, holding that a husband can be convicted of raping his wife and that marriage does not imply irrevocable consent.

Why is R v R important for criminal law?

It represents a landmark recognition of women's sexual autonomy within marriage and brought the law into line with modern human rights principles and gender equality.

What is the ratio in R v R?

The common law exemption preventing husbands from being convicted of raping their wives no longer exists. Marriage does not constitute ongoing consent to sexual intercourse.

What did the court decide in R v R?

The House of Lords abolished the marital rape exemption, holding that a husband can be convicted of raping his wife and that marriage does not imply irrevocable consent.

Why is R v R important for criminal law?

It represents a landmark recognition of women's sexual autonomy within marriage and brought the law into line with modern human rights principles and gender equality.

Criminal1 min read

R v R

[1992] 1 AC 599House of Lords1992

Cite this case in OSCOLA →All Criminal cases →

“House of Lords abolishes marital rape exemption in historic ruling”

Facts

A husband was charged with the rape and attempted rape of his wife after they had separated but before any divorce proceedings. The wife had left the matrimonial home and made it clear she no longer consented to sexual intercourse. The husband argued he could not be guilty of rape due to the traditional marital exemption.

Issues

Whether a husband can be guilty of raping his wife, and whether the common law marital rape exemption still forms part of English law.

Held

A husband can be guilty of raping his wife. The common law marital rape exemption no longer exists in English law.

Significance

This decision fundamentally changed the law of rape and marriage, establishing that consent within marriage can be withdrawn and that wives have the same protection from sexual violence as other women.

Read the full brief — free

You're reading the free summary of R v R. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.

Create free account Already have one? Sign in

No card required. Free forever.

OSCOLA Citation

R v R [1992] 1 AC 599 (HL)

Criminal LawFamily LawHuman Rights

Read the full judgment elsewhere

Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.

LLBGDLSQE1

More Criminal cases

R v Reece Martin Kelly

[2026] EWCA Crim 268

R v Richard Alexander Welsh

[2026] EWCA Crim 466

R v Robert Michael Thomas

[2026] EWCA Crim 305

This case is reproduced verbatim from the public judgment published by The National Archives under the UK Government's Open Government Licence v3.0. If you appear in this case and believe it should not be published — for example because your conviction was quashed on appeal, you have statutory anonymity, or for other privacy reasons — request removal here.