Article content continued

A lone dissenting opinion by another judge, however, warned of a potential slippery slope where women who surreptitiously stop taking the pill to get pregnant could themselves face a sexual-assault charge.

“The majority’s reasons … have the potential for increased, and potentially unwarranted, criminalization,” wrote Justice David Farrar. “Expanding criminal liability in this way would represent a dramatic step backwards.”

Chief Justice MacDonald countered that it is unlikely a woman getting pregnant surreptitiously would be construed as assault, noting that pregnancy has much more serious consequences for mothers than fathers.

Meanwhile, Hutchinson is now back in jail after being out on bail pending the appeal, and is considering an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, said his lawyer, Luke Craggs.

The defence had argued that the woman referred to only as N.C. in court documents to shield her identity did, in fact, give consent to sexual intercourse and that the birth-control tampering was not enough to negate that permission.

It wasn’t criminal — that was his position

“You can characterize what he did by sabotaging the condoms as sneaky and underhanded and dirty, but it wasn’t criminal — that was his position,” said Mr. Craggs.

Thursday’s ruling was hailed by a representative of the country’s rape-crisis centres, who said partners must be absolutely clear about each other’s intentions for sex to be legal.

“Getting consent in a deceitful way is rape,” said Hilla Kerner, spokesman for the Canadian Association of Sexual Assault Centres. “Real consent, free consent can only be informed consent.”