“Deception as to the nature and quality of sexual act vitiates consent.”
Flattery was a man who held himself out as having medical expertise. He deceived a young woman into submitting to sexual intercourse by telling her it was a surgical operation necessary for her health. She submitted believing it was medical treatment, not sexual intercourse.
Whether consent obtained through fundamental deception as to the nature of the act is valid for the purposes of sexual offences law.
The court held that Flattery's conviction should be upheld. The complainant's consent was vitiated because she was deceived as to the fundamental nature of what was being done to her.
This Victorian case established one of the foundational principles of consent in sexual offences - that deception as to the nature of the act vitiates consent. It remains good law and is regularly cited in modern sexual offences cases involving deception.
You're reading the free summary of R v Flattery. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.
No card required. Free forever.
OSCOLA Citation
R v Flattery (1877) 2 QBD 410
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Falls back to Google for old citations BAILII catalogues separately
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.