Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority [2012]

1. Facts:

• Scenario: D assured the woman he would wear a condom, but did not, leading to his conviction under s.76 of the Sexual Offences Act.

• Key Issue: Deception regarding the ‘nature’ of the act.

2. Outcome:

• Decision: The court convicted D under s.76 for deceiving the woman about the nature of the act (condom use).

3. Impact and Analysis:

• Deception of Nature: This case highlights that deception about a fundamental aspect of the sexual act (condom use) falls under s.76, demonstrating the importance of truthfulness regarding essential elements of consent.

• Legal Precedents: It emphasises that deception affecting the very nature of the act can render consent invalid under s.76.