R v Hysa [2007]

1. Facts:

• Scenario: V was very drunk, got into a car with D, and could not recall the incident but believed she had not consented.

• Charges: D was charged with rape.

• Key Issue: The problem of vitiating consent post-incident.

2. Outcome:

• Decision: The court followed Bree, highlighting that there is no set guidance on what degree of intoxication affects consent.

• Key Point: It is difficult to vitiate consent after the act has occurred.

3. Impact and Analysis:

• Consent and Intoxication: The case reinforces that consent must be assessed at the time of the act.

• Legal Challenges: Highlights the difficulties in assessing consent retrospectively, especially in cases involving significant intoxication.