Supreme Court of Finland R2012/1093 – KKO:2015:83

A, aware of his HIV infection, had several times unprotected anal sex with B without telling him about his illness. B had not been infected with HIV. The question of whether A had caused a serious danger to B’s life or health.

This document has been translated from its original language using DeepL Pro (AI translation technology) in order to make more content available to HIV Justice Academy users. We acknowledge the limitations of machine translation and do not guarantee the accuracy of the translated version.

Original text is available at https://finlex.fi/fi/oikeus/kko/kko/2015/20150083

Supreme Court, Second Chamber, Criminal Division, Judgment 690/2019 of 11 Mar. 2020, Rec. 1807/2018

INJURY. Transmission of HIV in cases in which the infected person knew of his partner’s disease. The complainant knew that her partner was a carrier of HIV, so having agreed to have sex with him, without any kind of prophylaxis, the transmission of the disease is not worthy of criminal reproach. External evidence of the disease that the complainant had to perceive, since she herself was diagnosed months later, and neither after this diagnosis, nor when she denounced an alleged aggression, did she make any allusion to the contagion of the disease. In dubio pro reo. Self endangerment of the complainant herself.

The SC dismissed the appeal filed against the sentence of the AP Madrid and confirmed the conviction for the crime of aggravated injury due to HIV infection.

This document has been translated from its original language using DeepL Pro (AI translation technology) in order to make more content available to HIV Justice Academy users. We acknowledge the limitations of machine translation and do not guarantee the accuracy of the translated version.

Colombian Constitutional Court on: HIV Criminalization, Sex Work, Abortion, Same Sex Marriage and Drugs

This document presents some of the most relevant and recent decisions in which the Court has discussed the limits to individual liberty, autonomy and privacy among issues concerning matters like: (i) HIV criminalization and other protections; (ii) sex work; (iii) abortion or voluntary interruption of pregnancy; (iv) rights of same sex couples to marriage; and, (v) personal drug possession and consumption.

R. v. Mabior

Ruling on “significant risk of bodily harm” which ostensibly found that people with HIV in Canada do not need to disclose their HIV-status before sex only if (i) the accused’s viral load at the time of sexual relations was low, and (ii) condom protection was used.

Her Majesty the Queen v. Henry Gerald Cuerrier

Ruling that failure to disclose HIV status constitutes fraud. Consequently, a partner’s consent to unprotected sexual activity is not valid. This ruling allows people with HIV in Canada who do not disclose their HIV-status before sex to be prosecuted under sexual assault laws.