R v Khan [1990] 1 WLR 1445

Court: Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Facts: D and others had sexual relations with C without consent. D then attempted to have sex with C but was unsuccessful. D was charged with attempted rape.

Held: The conviction was upheld. The court held that the intention to engage in sexual conduct, despite C’s non-consent, sufficed for an attempt. Only subjective recklessness as to consent is required. This affirmed that the judge's directions to the jury on the issue of consent were consistent with legal standards for both full rape and attempted rape.

Key Judicial Statement: Lord Justice Stuart-Smith noted, "For an attempted rape, it is enough to show that D intended to commit the act of intercourse, and only required subjective recklessness regarding the issue of consent."

💡Leveluplaw : The judgment highlights that establishing intent and awareness or recklessness regarding the victim's lack of consent is important in prosecuting rape offenses.