R v J. (Rape: Marital Exemption)

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Year1991
Date1991
CourtCrown Court
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
4 cases
  • PGA v The Queen
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 30 May 2012
    ...of the common law.’ R v Miller was a binding precedent in England until 1991. A second case which applied Hale's proposition is R v J — (rape: marital exemption) 100 There are numerous cases, including Australian cases, in which courts have assumed Hale's proposition to be correct at common......
  • R v R [1991]
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 23 October 1991
    ...decision in S. v. H.M. Advocate 1989 S.L.T. 469 and held that the whole concept of a marital exemption in rape was misconceived. He said, at p. 758: "Were it not for the deeply unsatisfactory consequences of reaching any other conclusion on the point, I would shrink, if sadly, from adopting......
  • Garcia v National Australia Bank Ltd
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • Invalid date
  • R v R (a Husband)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 14 March 1991
    ...consent." Since the ruling in July 1990 there had been two other decisions at first instance: R v CUNK ([1991] 1 All ER 755) and R v JUNK ([1991] 1 All ER 759). In R v C consideration had been given to section 1 of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1976, which "(1) For the purposes of sec......
1 books & journal articles
  • Criminalizing marital rape: a comparison of judicial and legislative approaches.
    • United States
    • Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law Vol. 39 No. 2, March - March 2006
    • 1 March 2006
    ...as "[t]he radical solution"). See also infra text accompanying notes 86-91. (69.) R. v. C., 1 All E.R. at 758. (70.) R. v. J., [1991] 1 All E.R. 759, 765 (Crown Court (71.) Id. (72.) Id. at 767. (73.) Id. at 768. (74.) Id. at 767. (75.) Id. at 768. (76.) R. v. R.[2], [1991] 2 All E.R. 257 (......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT