Lower sentencing levels for certain young offenders in cases of sexual offenses

The defendant, aged 18 years and 5 months, engaged in sexual intercourse with one girl aged 13 years and 7 months and one girl aged 14 years and 3 weeks. The intercourses occurred partly at the initiative of the aggrieved parties. Under previous legislation, the first incident would have given a four-year prison sentence, while the second would have resulted in six months of imprisonment. This reflected a sharp distinction in sentencing based on whether the aggrieved party was under or over the age of 14.

Following a legislative amendment on 1 July 2025, the minimum sentence for sexual intercourse with children under 14 was repealed. The legislature also determined that it was unnecessary to specify a standard sentencing level in the preparatory works for sexual offenses, instead entrusting the courts with the responsibility to impose proportionate penalties. The reason for these changes was that minimum sentences and fixed sentencing norms posed a genuine risk of disproportionately severe punishment in certain cases.

The Supreme Court noted that the legislature had assumed the repeal of minimum sentences would not affect the overall sentencing level for sexual offenses. At the same time, the legislature has stated that courts should have greater discretion to place less weight on whether the aggrieved party was above or below 14 years of age, as sexual activity with children in that age range is inherently blameworthy and potentially harmful. The Court further noted that the law is founded on the principle that children below the age of sexual consent cannot legally consent to sexual acts. However, the preparatory works acknowledge that a close proximity in age and developmental maturity between the aggrieved party and the defendant may be relevant in sentencing.

In determining the appropriate sentence, the Supreme Court emphasised the seriousness of the offenses, which involved both intercourse and oral sex. However, the acts were not the result of coercion or pressure from the defendant, which reduced the blameworthiness of his conduct and the degree of harm inflicted. Although the defendant had reached the age of majority, he was still a student living at home with his parents. Had he been under 18, he would have received a significantly more lenient sentence. The Court stated that culpability is somewhat reduced when the offense is committed by someone just over 18, compared to a fully mature adult. With regard to the younger of the two aggrieved parties, some weight was given to the fact that the defendant repeatedly inquired about her age and was told she was 15.

The total sentence was set at one year and six months of imprisonment, of which one year was suspended, subject to a probation period of three years.

The judgment provides guidance on sentencing levels for sexual activity with children under 14 and between 14 and 16 years of age, under sections 299, 300, and 302 of the Penal Code.

Read the judgment from the Supreme Court (Norwegian only) (PDF)

Area of law: Criminal law. Sexual offences. 

Key paragraphs: 22, 25, 27, 29, 37

Justices: Webster, Falkanger, Bergsjø, Østensen Berglund, Stenvik