In English law, the basis for such claims is "very narrow", as ruled by the Court of Appeal in R v Linekar [1995] 3 All ER 69 73.
A paper on website The Student Lawyer examined the basis for fraud as grounds for negating consent.
Examples given by the author included sex in the following circumstances:[6] "Andrew is secretly having an affair but denies this to his wife... Barney exaggerates his financial success and pretends to like the same music and films as his date in order to impress her... Charlie dyes his hair and pretends to be in his mid-30s on a dating website when he is really in his 50s... Derek is unhappy in his marriage and is considering whether to leave his wife; he does not mention his misgivings..." In these examples, the sexual partner in each case would not have consented had all matters likely to be relevant to their decision been fully disclosed, and a reasonable person might be expected to realise this.
The crime of rape was unique in the respect that it focused on the victim's state of mind and actions in addition to that of the defendant.
The victim was required to prove a continued state of physical resistance, and consent was conclusively presumed when a man had intercourse with his wife.
In January 1982, the Government accepted an amendment to the Criminal Justice Bill the effect of which, if enacted, would be to compel judges to sentence men convicted of rape to imprisonment.
This followed a case earlier that month in which John Allen, 33, businessman and convicted of raping a 17-year-old hitchhiker, had been fined £2,000 by Judge Bernard Richard, who alleged the victim's "contributory negligence".
[18][19] The final paragraph of section 4 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 provided that it was rape for a man to have carnal knowledge of a married woman by impersonating her husband.
The definition of rape at common law was discussed in DPP v Morgan [1976] AC 182, [1975] 2 WLR 913, [1975] 2 All ER 347, 61 Cr App R 136, [1975] Crim LR 717, HL.
This was intended to give effect to the Report of the Advisory Group on the Law of Rape (Cmnd 6352) and to the opinions expressed by the House of Lords in DPP v Morgan.
At common law a boy under the age of fourteen years could not commit rape as a principal offender[26] as he was irrefutably presumed to be incapable of sexual intercourse.
[29] Section 37(3) of, and paragraph 1(b) of the Second Schedule to, the Sexual Offences Act 1956 provided that a person guilty of an attempt to commit rape was liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding seven years.
[30] The maximum penalty for attempted rape was increased to imprisonment for life by sections 3(1) and (2) of the Sexual Offences Act 1985.