We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
Does "No, Not Without a Condom" Mean "Yes, Even Without a Condom"?: The Fallout from R v Hutchinson.
- Authors
Gotell, Lise; Grant, Isabel
- Abstract
In R v Kirkpatrick, the Court of Appeal for British Columbia held that consent to sexual activity cannot be established where a man proceeds with unprotected vaginal intercourse when his sexual partner has insisted on a condom. While this finding should be uncontroversial, it is in fact contrary to the Supreme Court of Canada ruling in R v Hutchinson. In this comment we argue that the approach taken in Kirkpatrick is correct and consistent with the landmark decision in R v Ewanchuk. We urge the Supreme Court of Canada to reconsider its majority judgment in Hutchinson in order to fully recognize the central role that a condom plays in whether a woman agrees to participate in sexual activity.
- Subjects
BRITISH Columbia. Court of Appeal; SEXUAL intercourse -- Law &; legislation; UNSAFE sex; CONDOM use; HUMAN sexuality &; law
- Publication
Dalhousie Law Journal, 2020, Vol 43, Issue 2, p767
- ISSN
0317-1663
- Publication type
Article