In R v. Linekar (1995), what type of promise was made that did not affect consent?

In R v. Linekar (1995), the case primarily revolves around the legal principle of consent and the reliance on promises made in the context of sexual activity. The court determined that a false promise to pay for sex did not affect the consent given by the other party. This means that, despite the defendant's misrepresentation regarding the payment for sexual services, the individual involved retained their ability to consent to the act itself.

The ruling underscores the importance of distinguishing between the act of consent and the validity of the surrounding circumstances or promises that may influence personal decisions. In this case, the court reasoned that consent to the sexual act is a free and informed choice, and deceptive promises regarding payment do not invalidate this consent. Thus, individuals can still consent, independent of misleading claims regarding monetary transactions.

This case reinforces the notion that while ethical and moral considerations may be at play, the law primarily evaluates whether true consent was given, without being swayed by the presence of dishonest promises related to the transaction.