Home » Posts tagged 'consent'

consent

No Still Means No: Clarifying the 5-4 Split in R v Kirkpatrick

At the end of July 2022, one message rang loud and clear across the country, straight from the Supreme Court: when it comes to consent, only yes means yes.  It was far from the first time that the SCC had said this or something like it. But this time, when the SCC released its decision […]

Contemporaneousness of Sexual Consent in R v AE

Content Warning: This article includes depictions of sexual violence that may evoke strong emotions for some readers. The jurisprudence surrounding the requirement for consent as a defence for sexual assault has expanded substantially to dispel the stereotypes and myths associated with sexual assault, most recently refined in R v Barton, 2019 SCC 33 [Barton]. Despite this […]

Incapacity Precludes - not Vitiates - Consent in R. v. G.F.

Content Warning: Sexual assault and intoxication The Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) has clarified that capacity is a precondition for consent in sexual assault offences in R v G.F., 2021 SCC 20 [G.F.]. As the two are “inextricably joined,” the majority ruled that trial judges are not required to consider the two issues in any […]

Believing the Intoxicated Survivor: R v Kishayinew and the Nuanced Test for Sexual Assault

Content Warning: This article includes depictions of sexual violence that may evoke strong emotions. In the last three decades, the law of sexual assault has evolved drastically, most recently with the added definitions of consent under s. 273.1 of the Criminal Code, RSC 1985 c C-46 [Criminal Code]. In November, the Supreme Court of Canada […]

Consent is Neither Implied Nor Retroactive: R v Wilcox

In R v Wilcox, 2014 SCC 75, a paragraph-long oral judgment of the Supreme Court affirms the judgment of Quebec's Court of Appeal, 2014 QCCA 321. In that decision, the majority of the Court of Appeal upheld a trial decision that found James Steven Wilcox guilty of aggravated sexual assault. The charge stemmed from Wilcox's failure to disclose his HIV-positive status […]

Consent and Sexual Assault Causing Bodily Harm: R v Zhao  

Can a person legally consent to sexual assault causing bodily harm? In the wake of the Supreme Court of Canada’s landmark decision in R v Jobidon, [1991] 2 SCR 714, there remains some confusion regarding how far to extend the broad proposition outlined in that case – namely, that bodily harm cannot be consented to. […]

Secretly Poking Holes in Condoms Vitiates Consent to Sexual Activity: R v Hutchinson

After two trials and cycles through the appellate court system, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) has dismissed the appeal in R v Hutchinson, 2014 SCC 19 [Hutchinson]. Building on the decision in R v Mabior, [2012] 2 SCR 584 [Mabior], the Court in Hutchinson further clarified the law surrounding consent to sexual activity, holding that […]

R v Alboukhari: Misapprehended Evidence and “Reasonable Steps” to Ascertain Consent

In R v Alboukhari, 2013 ONCA 581 [Alboukhari], a decision released by the Ontario Court of Appeal on September 27, 2013, the court closely analyzed the trial judge’s finding related to a sexual encounter between two young people on a camping trip. The trial judge had found that the defence of honest but mistaken belief […]