FavoriteLoadingSave to briefcase | Rating: | By (2014)

  • PrintEmail Link
  • Viewed 2,728 times | Saved to 292 briefcases
LATTER V BRADDELL [1880]

Facts:

a maid is forced by her employers to undress and undergo a pregnancy examination against her will. She sues for battery. Defending doctor claims consent.

Issue(s):

Vitiating Consent: Duress

Ratio:

Lindley J.: PL had it entirely in her own power to comply or not to comply with her mistress’s orders, and there was no evidence whatever to show that anything improper or illegal was threatened to be done if she had not complied. There was no evidence of any force or violence, or threat of force of violence.
(dissent): “I cannot adopt the view that PL consented because she yielded without her will having been overpowered by [physical] force or fear of violence. That is not, in my opinion, an accurate definition of consent in a case like this.”


Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to participate.

This document is a general discussion of certain legal and related issues and must not be relied upon as legal advice. This document may not have been written or reviewed by a legal practitioner. For more information, please see the website Terms of Service.