R v Linekar [1995] 3 All ER 69

Key point

  • At common law, fraud which did not induce a mistake about the nature of the act or of the identity of the man does not vitiate consent

Facts

  • D hired a prostitute, but did not pay her after
  • D was convicted of rape

Held (Court of Appeal)

  • Appealed allowed – conviction was overturned
  • There was no mistake as to the nature of the act which was sexual nor the identity of D

Commentary

  • At common law mistake as to purpose did not vitiate consent unlike the current law under s76 Sexual Offences Act 2003 where deception as to purpose raises a conclusive presumption
  • In Jheeta the Court of Appeal at [28] stated that there was no deception as to purpose in Linekar either and thus s76(2)(a) would not apply