“Informed consent required for risk of serious sexual disease transmission”
Konzani, who knew he was HIV positive, had unprotected sexual intercourse with three women without disclosing his condition. The women contracted HIV. He argued that they had consented to sexual intercourse and therefore to any associated risks.
Whether consent to sexual intercourse includes consent to the risk of transmission of serious sexual diseases, and what level of knowledge is required for valid consent to such risks.
The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction for inflicting grievous bodily harm. Informed consent was required for the risk of serious disease transmission.
This case establishes important principles about informed consent in sexual offences and the limits of consent to serious harm. It's crucial for understanding the intersection of consent, sexual offences, and bodily harm.
You're reading the free summary of Consent — R v Konzani. 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 Konzani [2005] EWCA Crim 706
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.