They took this view because , in their estimation it was not in the public interest for persons to cause actual bodily or to wound others for no reason. The decision of whether an individual can consent to harm presents a moral dilemma in the judiciary, leading to many arbitrary deceptions which are in clear need of resolution, also not further made easy by the decision in R v Brown.
Also, following the decision of Lords, a lot of unresolved issues were at stake.:
Where and when should a line be drawn between violence which one can consent to, and violence that one cannot consent to?
What business does the law have with acts taking place, with the active consent of all the participants, in private, in the absence of express legislation, making such acts