R v H
Touching a person's clothing can be touching for the purposes of sexual assault under the Sexual Offences Act 2003.
Facts
H approached a woman crossing a field at night and asked whether she fancied a shag. When she ignored him, he grabbed her tracksuit bottoms by the fabric and tried to pull her towards him, but did not touch her body. She escaped. He was charged with sexual assault under section 3 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, which requires intentional touching that is sexual.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal upheld his conviction. Lord Woolf CJ said that touching a person's clothing is sufficient to amount to touching for the purposes of section 3. On whether the touching was sexual, the jury should consider first whether the touching, because of its nature, may be sexual, and second whether, because of its circumstances or the purpose of any person in relation to it, it was in fact sexual. Grabbing her tracksuit bottoms together with his question could be found to be sexual.
Related cases on sexual offences and consent
- Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority [2011] EWHC 2849 (Admin)
- R (F) v Director of Public Prosecutions [2013] EWHC 945 (Admin), [2014] QB 581
- R v B [2006] EWCA Crim 2945, [2007] 1 WLR 1567
- R v Bree [2007] EWCA Crim 804, [2008] QB 131
- R v Devonald [2008] EWCA Crim 527
- R v Jheeta [2007] EWCA Crim 1699, [2008] 1 WLR 2582
- R v Lawrance [2020] EWCA Crim 971, [2020] 1 WLR 5025
- R v Linekar [1995] QB 250
Studying criminal law? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
