levo

Criminal Law: Necessity Defences and Preliminary Offences

Necessity

  • 3 things to know
  • Components 2 and 3

Overview

R v Dudley and Stephens refusing the defence to shipwrecked sailors, the sentence they actually served, and the narrow medical cases from Re F to Re A that show the courts have not shut the door entirely.

What you need to know

Answer each one before you reveal it.

Your recallNot started
Key term

State the three conditions for necessity identified in Re A (Conjoined Twins) [2001].

Key term

What is the defence of necessity?

Numbers

Which case rejected necessity as a defence to murder?

Questions from this subtopic

Each one with the model answer underneath.

  1. 1

    What is the defence of necessity?

    Model answer

    Necessity is a defence claimed where breaking the law was the lesser of two evils. English law recognises the defence only in narrow circumstances.

  2. 2

    Which case rejected necessity as a defence to murder?

    Model answer

    R v Dudley and Stephens (1884) rejected necessity as a defence to murder. Two shipwrecked sailors who killed and ate a cabin boy were convicted.

  3. 3

    Why did the court in R v Dudley and Stephens (1884) refuse the defence?

    Model answer

    The court refused to allow anyone to choose which innocent life should be sacrificed. Allowing the defence would set a standard the law could not enforce.

  4. 4

    What happened to the defendants in R v Dudley and Stephens (1884)?

    Model answer

    The defendants were sentenced to death and the sentence was commuted. Six months' imprisonment was served instead.

  5. 5

    Which case allowed necessity in a medical setting?

    Model answer

    Re A (Conjoined Twins) [2001] allowed doctors to separate conjoined twins although one would inevitably die. The Court of Appeal treated the operation as justified by necessity.

  6. 6

    State the three conditions for necessity identified in Re A (Conjoined Twins) [2001].

    Model answer

    The act must be needed to avoid inevitable and irreparable evil. The defendant must do no more than is reasonably necessary. The evil inflicted must not be disproportionate to the evil avoided.

Other ways to work this

The same content, four other ways.

What is inside Levo

Six ways to work the same material.

1Closed book
2Open book
3Closed book

The 3-step method, run for you

Answer cold, learn it, then prove it stuck. Levo tracks the jump between your first attempt and your last.

Parliamentary and European Law Making
Delegated Legislation
Statutory Interpretation
Judicial Precedent

Cram a whole paper in one sitting

Sort every topic into what you know and what you do not, then drill only the weak ones.

The court sits in .
StrasbourgLondonParis

Blank Blitz makes facts automatic

Rapid timed gap-fills on the terms and numbers you need to recall without thinking.

AAn interim injunction restrains publication before trial.
BPublication cannot be undone.
CAn injunction may be the only effective remedy.

Build It gets the exam shape right

Assemble a full-mark answer from its marking points, in the order an examiner wants them.

A Public Bill changes the general law.
TrueFalse

Test It catches misconceptions

Spot the fault in a statement. The traps are the mistakes students actually make.

721941163128510

Brain Breaks between sessions

Short focus games to reset attention, so the next set lands better than the last.

Every question in Criminal Law: Necessity Defences and Preliminary Offences, on a schedule.

Attempt a question from memory, write the correct version, then attempt it again. Levo records the jump between your first attempt and your last, and brings each question back on the day you are due to forget it.

Or £46 a year, about £3.83 a month. Cancel anytime.