R v Olugboja
Rape does not require force or the threat of force: the question is whether there was real consent or mere submission.
Facts
Mr Olugboja and a friend gave two 16 year old girls a lift home from a disco, but drove them to the friend's home instead. The friend raped one of the girls. Mr Olugboja then told the other girl to take off her trousers, and she did so, because she was frightened, and he had sexual intercourse with her. She did not resist or scream, but she did not consent. He was convicted of rape, and argued that there was no rape because he had used no force or threats.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction. Dunn LJ said that rape does not require force, fear or fraud: the question is simply whether the victim consented. The jury should be directed that consent covers a range of states of mind, from actual desire to reluctant acquiescence, and that there is a difference between consent and submission, although every consent involves a submission, it does not follow that a mere submission involves consent. The jury had been entitled to find that the girl had merely submitted.
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 H [2005] EWCA Crim 732, [2005] 1 WLR 2005
- R v Jheeta [2007] EWCA Crim 1699, [2008] 1 WLR 2582
- R v Lawrance [2020] EWCA Crim 971, [2020] 1 WLR 5025
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.
