Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Consent (Youth- (Burrell v Harmer- Two boys (12 and 13) went for a tattoo,…
Consent
Youth-
Burrell v Harmer- Two boys (12 and 13) went for a tattoo, it became inflamed. Court ruled 'the boys were too young to appreciate the nature and implications of what the were consenting to'.
Consent is invalid on the grounds of youth as the courts believe the youth lack emotional and intellectual maturity.
Duress-
This is where the defence gave was not freely given, the person may agree to do something under pressure.
-
-
-
-
-
Medical Treatment-
In Brown Lord Templeman stated 'surgery involves intentional violence resulting in actual or sometimes serious bodily harm but surgery is a lawful activity.
Miss B V an NHS Trust- Hospital were convicted for treating a patient who refuses treatment on the claims that she lacked the mental capacity to make such a decision
Must have the mental capacity to decline otherwise the doctors can treats you regardless, including if you're unconscious.
Bodily Adornment-
It is within the public interest and covers: tattooing, body piercings and circumcision.
Wilson- Wife asked him to brand his initials on her body, he was convicted and then The Court of Appeal acquitted him.
Dangerous Exhibition-
Public displays, a show which involves an element of risk
-
Rough Horseplay-
This covers behavior which young men might be expected to engage in provided no harm was intended and the defendant genuinely believed consent was given by the victim.
Jones- Played bumps with two boys outside a youth club who they didn't know, this resulted in serious injuries to both boys. On appeal the conviction was quashed on the basis of the judge directing them poorly.
Consent is a recognised as a defence to non-fatal offences against the person in limited circumstances.
-
-
-Implied: assumed, persauded
As it is in he public interest, consent isn't available as a defence to the infliction of harm.
The availability of consent as a defence to assault and battery was confirmed by the Court of Appeal in AG's Ref (No.6 of 1980).
-
-
-