Law Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for legal professionals, students, and others with experience or interest in law. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
It seems that in Canada, there must be an active effort to ascertain the complainant’s consent for each and every sexual act or episode of sexual acts and that prior rapport with the complainant (even such as a very sexually active marriage) cannot be taken to indicate consent to a future episode of sex.
In what other jurisdictions is this also true, and in which jurisdictions, conversely, can consent be taken to have been passively indicated by the general situational context?
You claim:
in Canada, there must be an active effort to ascertain the complainant’s consent for each and every sexual act or episode of sexual acts
This is not even true in Canada. The "reasonable steps" requirement you refer to is simply a prerequisite to establish a defence that the accused held an honest but mistaken belief in communicated consent.
It is not an independent offence to fail to take those steps, although it leaves one open to huge risk in the case that the other person does not consent.
If the other person does consent, then the activity does not become sexual assault simply for failing to take reasonable steps to ascertain that consent.
It seems to me that the point that is easy to forget yet the most important is that the burden of proof of on the complainant or crown to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that they did not consent.
But for this it seems extremely unfair that nonverbally communicated consent can turn black into white by the self declared state of a person’s mind or there is effectively imposed a most awkward, inhuman, and unjust need to actively endeavour to ascertain a partner’s state of consent for every occasion of sex. Jen’s answer certainly addressed this but I don’t think it emphasised it prominently enough, so I am re-emphasising it here.
