# data[].attributes.body
Because it set out what level of harm someone could consent to.  It was also important because it established at what level of harm the courts would intervene and be paternalistic when it comes to acts you have consented to.  A large part of why the courts got involved was also because the videos got out into the public domain and therefore it was not only those involved who could view it but also the general public and it was whether or not the videos of those sadomasochistic acts should be out in the public domain available to watch.

# data[].attributes.body
This case is important because it highlights the conflict of law and morality

# data[].attributes.headline
This case was important because, essentially, it established that our private lives are not so private after all.

# data[].attributes.subject
This case was important because, essentially, it established that our private lives are not so private after all.

# data[].attributes.body
It was so important because it highlighted the social stigma behind S&M gay relationships. The leading judge decided that he had a moral duty to convict these men.

# data[].attributes.body
the case was important because it was the first case about consent and its limits. it redefined where the court could or could not intervene.

# data[].attributes.body
The case was important since it drew the line with regard to how much harm on could validly consent to. In this way, one could not rely on the defence of consent if the harm that was being inflicted rose to a certain level, as was deemed the case for severer sadomasochistic, sexual acts. Since it was a House of Lords’ decision, it would bind any future lower Courts and so set out an important precedent for that area of law. In this way R v Brown strongly shaped the law in this area, having been applied in future cases that dealt with consent to sexual, sadomasochistic practices such as in the case of R v Emmet.

# data[].attributes.body
In retrospect, the case allows us to reflect on how biased people were with regard to the treatment of homosexuals and uncommon sexual practices in the law. In a way, it measures how far we've come. The case could be considered emblematic of the common law - how judicial decisions are inherently linked to

# data[].attributes.headline
I think the case was important because it highlighted what we mean by consent and what is allowed and not allowed to be given as consent. It was also important because of how much publicity the case received, it then shaped the way other cases were perceived and the outcomes of other cases.

# data[].attributes.subject
I think the case was important because it highlighted what we mean by consent and what is allowed and not allowed to be given as consent. It was also important because of how much publicity the case received, it then shaped the way other cases were perceived and the outcomes of other cases.

# data[].attributes.body
The case is important as it highlights the extent to which the law can interfere with out lives.

It also highlights how antiquated our views on sexuality were. In later cases it is clear to see how our morality has been influenced by the 50 shades phenomenon.

# data[].attributes.headline
The case was important in respect to whether the state should try to govern and intervene private lives and consensual sexual relationships.

# data[].attributes.subject
The case was important in respect to whether the state should try to govern and intervene private lives and consensual sexual relationships.

# data[].attributes.body
Controversial arguments were made regarding the issue of ‘consent’ in this case of sado-masochism. The issue of ‘violence’ and ‘cruelty’ was also attended to and was ruled to be an act of uncivilised activity. I think that this case was important not only because for its rulings and attention caught, but also on how the court views on the issue of moral consent and violence as a whole. It also set foot for the later cases regarding similar events. This case, R v Brown, is discussed as wildly and widespread as the 50 Shades of Grey in the comparatively more modern day world. Both touching on the issue of ‘consent’, ‘violence’ and ‘cruelty’.

# data[].attributes.body
The case is important because it raises issues about consent and what the courts should get involved with.
Also, the established exceptions started off as a bit of leeway for the courts but it could be argued that the idea that in some cases the courts shouldn't get involved with private matters, has gradually been pushed further. In more recent cases there has been a sort of 'Fifty Shades of Grey' defence whereby people have been acquitted for sexually violent acts with the justification that they followed what was in the books. These seemingly opposite judgments in recent cases raise interesting questions about how differently judges can decide cases. On the one hand there's paternalism and on the other there's this idea of free choice.

# data[].attributes.body
The case was important as it portrays attitudes of the time towards homosexuals. This case dealt with various controversial issues such as whether one could consent to bodily harm being inflicted upon themselves in private. It also showed that the judges were too preoccupied with their old fashioned views.

# data[].attributes.headline
This case is important because its controversial and illustrated the hart and devlin debate. It highlighted the idea of how significantly hard it is to draw a line between law and morality interference.

# data[].attributes.subject
This case is important because its controversial and illustrated the hart and devlin debate. It highlighted the idea of how significantly hard it is to draw a line between law and morality interference.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe the case was important because it showed the difference in what people think is moral. In my opinion the Judges were intervening in peoples personal lives and basically telling them that what they enjoy is wrong. What one finds enjoyable may not be enjoyable to the next and I don't think people should be penalised or charged for that. Funny enough in the modern world these cases are being presented and people are not being charged, it just goes to show how the world changes. -Mahogany

# data[].attributes.body
This case was important because it showed how the law was trying to apply the queries for which it was created for, but by doing so meddling became an issue. Trying to solve this problem of whether it is right to breach someone's Private life has had an impact on the job that the law is attempting to produce. Many issues are raised due to this and it teaches us that sometimes the law may do more harm than good.

# data[].attributes.body
Important for law of consent in assault but also how far the state should interfere in the bedroom/private lives

# data[].attributes.headline
It brought interesting speculation into whether the law can intervene in the private lives of people and of consensual acts done  behind closed doors. 

# data[].attributes.subject
It brought interesting speculation into whether the law can intervene in the private lives of people and of consensual acts done  behind closed doors. 

# data[].attributes.body
It also raised the issue of consent.

# data[].attributes.body
This case was important because...
- it was about whether and how far the state can interfere in our private lives.
- It was about consent and whether you can consent to that level of harm.
- homosexual activity

# data[].attributes.headline
It was important in terms of addressing whether you can be charged for actions performed behind closed doors, and also to what level you can consent to assault. 

# data[].attributes.subject
It was important in terms of addressing whether you can be charged for actions performed behind closed doors, and also to what level you can consent to assault. 

# data[].attributes.headline
this case was important, because for me, there is should be no such thing as a level of harm you cannot consent to; if you agree to do something willingly and freely without harming others, the law should not be able to stop you from doing this. This case is a prime example of the law overstepping it's mark.

# data[].attributes.subject
this case was important, because for me, there is should be no such thing as a level of harm you cannot consent to; if you agree to do something willingly and freely without harming others, the law should not be able to stop you from doing this. This case is a prime example of the law overstepping it's mark.

# data[].attributes.body
R v Brown is an important case because it delves into ideas about individual autonomy and legal paternalism. In the case the court decides that the state has the right to intervene with people's sexual practice if there is an unacceptable level of harm, and in doing so indicated that the level of harm in these cases was unacceptable. Furthermore, it indicates the attitude of the judiciary towards sadomasochistic acts between men, which arguably indicates the homophobia present within the court, as other cases have shown that sadomasochistic acts between a heterosexual couple can be consented to.

# data[].attributes.body
This case tackled the question of whether one can consent to harm against them and whether this harm can be on the level of GBH.
This case grappled with issues such as homophobia and the autonomy of the individual within society. Can the state interfere with our private lives?

# data[].attributes.headline
This case is significant as it brought up the question as to whether what we do away from the public eye is truly private. Furthermore, it highlighted that fact that the law controls most aspects of our lives. In addition, It thrust homosexuality truly into the public eye and in this case in an unsavoury light.

# data[].attributes.subject
This case is significant as it brought up the question as to whether what we do away from the public eye is truly private. Furthermore, it highlighted that fact that the law controls most aspects of our lives. In addition, It thrust homosexuality truly into the public eye and in this case in an unsavoury light.

# data[].attributes.body
It dealt with a few contentious issues such as state involvement in the private lives of consenting adults and homophobia/an unwillingness of the judiciary to challenge old fashioned views.

# data[].attributes.body
I think it was important because it highlighted that there may be levels of harm that we cannot consent to, even as capable adults. This was controversial as for many it was thought that the law shouldn’t be allowed to interfere with things that happen in private and if it’s personal choice and it should be left up to the individuals.

# data[].attributes.body
Because it looked into the matter of private vs public life and whether the judge should be able to rule on a matter that was committed in private.

# data[].attributes.body
Because it makes you consider how law controls aspects of our lives that it maybe shouldn't? When is it right for the state to interfere with consensual acts amongst adults. Aren't our sex lives our own?

# data[].attributes.headline
The case brought to attention are our private lives really private? It also indicated that certain judges put their viewpoints in front of what the law should be. 

# data[].attributes.subject
The case brought to attention are our private lives really private? It also indicated that certain judges put their viewpoints in front of what the law should be. 

# data[].attributes.body
It's about whether the state gets to interfere in our sex lives. And what sort of interference should be allowed.