Self-defence

Question 1

Palmer (1971) A.C. 814

Answer 1

A person attacked may defend themselves using only what is reasonably necessary; self-defence requires common sense not legal formula.

Question 2

Beckford (1988) 1 A.C. 130

Answer 2

Self-defence test: use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances as the defendant honestly believes them to be in defence of self or another.

Question 3

Collins (2016) EWHC 33 (Admin)

Answer 3

Self-defence has two elements: (1) subjective necessity; (2) objective/subjective reasonableness tested against defendant’s honest belief.

Question 4

Gladstone Williams (1987) QB 589

Answer 4

Mistaken belief in threat is assessed on what the defendant honestly believed even if that belief is unreasonable

Question 5

Jones (2006) UKHL 16 – Scope of s3 CLA

Answer 5

Doubt that s3 CLA applies to non-violent property damage; force in s3 likely refers to force against persons.

Question 6

Jones (2006) UKHL 16 – Reasonableness

Answer 6

Reasonableness of force must be judged in its social setting by democratic norms not cowboy sheriff standard.

Question 7

Martin (Anthony) (2001) EWCA Crim 2245

Answer 7

Jury may consider physical characteristics of defendant in assessing reasonableness but not psychiatric conditions except in exceptional circumstances.

Question 8

Cheeseman (2019) EWCA Crim 149

Answer 8

Householder defence requires defendant’s honest belief that person was a trespasser; jury need not delve into property law niceties.

Question 9

Oye (2013) EWCA Crim 1725

Answer 9

Insane delusions cannot set the standard of reasonableness; objective assessment still applies even within delusions.

Question 10

Hichens (2011) EWCA Crim 1626

Answer 10

Self-defence and s3 CLA can extend to use of force against innocent third parties to prevent crime by someone else.

Question 11

Keane (2010) EWCA Crim 2514

Answer 11

Original aggressor may use self-defence only if the victim’s violence was so disproportionate that roles were reversed.

Question 12

Dadson (1850) 2 Den 35

Answer 12

Mistake of fact: where defendant did not know facts (e.g. that victim was committing felony) self-defence fails.

Question 13

Hatton (2005) EWCA Crim 2951

Answer 13

Drunken mistake: under common law (O’Grady) defendants cannot rely on mistakes induced by intoxication.

Question 14

Taj (2018) EWCA Crim 1743

Answer 14

s76(5) CJIA intoxication includes immediate effects of drugs/alcohol causing mistaken belief but not long-term mental illness.

Question 15

Jaggard v Dickinson (1981)

Answer 15

Under Criminal Damage Act 1971 intoxicated mistakes as to property defence allowed where honest belief exists (s5(3)).