| R v R | |
|---|---|
.svg) | |
| Court | House of Lords |
| Decided | 23 October 1991 |
| Citation | (1992) 94 Cr App R 216, [1991] 3 WLR 767, [1991] UKHL 12, [1992] Fam Law 108, (1991) 155 JP 989, [1992] 1 FLR 217, [1992] 1 AC 599, [1992] AC 599, [1991] 4 All ER 481, (1991) 155 JPN 752, [1992] Crim LR 207 |
| Case history | |
| Prior action | None |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Lord Keith, Lord Brandon, Lord Griffiths, Lord Ackner and Lord Lowry |
| Case opinions | |
| Decision by | Lord Keith |
| Concurrence | Lord Brandon, Lord Griffiths, Lord Ackner, Lord Lowry |
| Keywords | |
| marital rape | |
R v R [1991] UKHL 12 is a House of Lords judgement in which R was convicted of attempting to rape his wife but appealed his conviction on the grounds of a marital rape exemption whereby R claimed a husband cannot be convicted of raping his wife as his wife had given consent to sexual intercourse through the contract of marriage which she could not withdraw. The court considered the common law defence of marital rape and declared that it did not exist in English law.[1]
- ^ "R. v R [1991] UKHL 12 (23 October 1991)". Bailii.org. Retrieved 1 March 2016.