ABSTRACT
The exercise of writing from a comparative perspective on any legal topic requires the existence both of similarities and of differences. Of similarities, because in the absence of such it is hard to draw any meaningful comparison; it is easier, after all, to compare two different kinds of cheese than to compare cheese to chalk. Of differences, because if there are none there is no need to draw any comparison in the fi rst place. What makes the law of Ireland, both North and South, such a useful source of comparison is the fact that both jurisdictions have the same common law basis as do England and Wales, but have, especially south of the border, diverged to a signifi cant extent from that jurisdiction. Such divergences may vary from topic to topic, as can be seen from the previous three volumes in this series. In relation to insanity, the old McNaghten Rules have been abandoned in favour of a statutory formulation on both sides of the border; 1 in relation to diminished responsibility, the differences are more marked in the South than in the North, especially since the passing of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. 2 In relation to complicity, the law is much the same, but the scandals of recent years involving the treatment of children by clergy and other religious, again on both sides of the border, have highlighted the importance of the topic to a very signifi - cant extent. 3 And in relation to general defences, the continuing existence of the excessive defence doctrine in the South after its rejection, both in England and Wales and indeed in the country of its origin, again provides a very useful point of comparison. 4
When one turns to the issue of consent one again sees a different picture. On the one hand, there are no major doctrinal differences, as in relation to insanity and the doctrine of excessive defence. Nor is the law the focus of any major debate at the level of public discourse, as in relation to complicity and the child abuse scandal. Differences there undoubtedly are, but
philosophy or of principle.
