“Consent is no defence to intentional infliction of bodily harm outside recognised exceptions.”
Whether consent can provide a lawful defence to charges of assault causing actual bodily harm, wounding, or grievous bodily harm. The case concerned consensual homosexual sadomasochistic activities and whether the participants' consent rendered their conduct lawful.
Consent does not provide a defence to intentional infliction of bodily harm; such conduct is unlawful regardless of consent, except where justified by recognised exceptions such as lawful games, sports, chastisement, or surgical procedures.
You're reading the free summary of R v Brown. 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.
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.