Burrell v Harmer [1967]: Exploring Consent and Criminal Liability

Burrell v Harmer

Case Name: Burrell v Harmer

  • Citation: [1967] Crim LR 169
  • Court: High Court of Justice (England and Wales)
  • Year: 1967
  • Area of Law: Criminal Law – Consent; Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm (ABH)

Burrell v Harmer [1967] Crim LR 169 is an important English criminal law case that examines the limits of consent, particularly in relation to minors.

Key Facts (Burrell v Harmer)

The defendant, a tattoo artist, tattooed two boys aged 12 and 13. Although the boys had agreed to the process, the defendant was charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm under Section 47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.

Legal Issue

The main question was whether the boys’ consent to the tattooing constituted a valid legal defence to the assault accusation.

Judgment in Burrell v Harmer

The court held that the boys’ consent was invalid. It determined that the minors lacked the capacity to comprehend the nature and consequences of receiving a tattoo, rendering their consent ineffective. Consequently, the defendant’s conviction was upheld. The actions amounted to assault.

Legal Significance

This judgement established the fact that consent cannot be used as a legitimate defence in assault proceedings unless the individual has the capacity to comprehend the nature of the act.  In the case of minors, this means they must be mature enough to understand the consequences of their consent.  The ruling stressed that simply agreeing is insufficient; the consenting person must have the mental capacity to make an informed decision.

List of references used:


YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE:

MORE FROM CRIMINAL LAW:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *