WJEC A-Level Law 603-1978-1
Law Making in Wales and the UK
Delegated Legislation
Statutory Interpretation
Judicial Precedent
The Civil Courts and Dispute Resolution
The Criminal Process and the Criminal Courts
Legal Personnel and the Judiciary
Access to Justice and Funding
Tort: Rules and Theory
Tort: Negligence
Tort: Occupiers' Liability
Tort: Remedies
Human Rights: Rules and TheoryHuman rights
Human Rights: Key Convention ProvisionsHuman rights
Human Rights: RestrictionsHuman rights
Human Rights: EnforcementHuman rights
Human Rights: Protection and ReformHuman rights
Contract: Rules and TheoryContract
Contract: FormationContract
Contract: TermsContract
Contract: Misrepresentation and DuressContract
Contract: DischargeContract
Contract: RemediesContract
Criminal Law: Rules and TheoryCriminal
Criminal Law: General Elements of LiabilityCriminal
Criminal Law: Offences Against the PersonCriminal
Criminal Law: Property OffencesCriminal
Criminal Law: DefencesCriminal
Criminal Law: Preliminary OffencesCriminal
Criminal Law: Defences
- 7 subtopics
- 21 things to know
- A2 Units 3 and 4
- Criminal Law, one of three A2 areas of which two are studied
What Criminal Law: Defences covers
Criminal Law: Defences is examined in A2 Units 3 and 4 — Criminal Law, one of three areas of which a student studies two. Unit 3 applies these rules to a scenario and Unit 4 evaluates them.. It covers insanity and the M'Naghten Rules, automatism: insane and non-insane, intoxication by alcohol and by drugs, self-defence and the prevention of crime, duress by threats, duress of circumstances and necessity and evaluating the capacity and necessity defences.
Where it is assessed
A2 Units 3 and 4
criminal law — one of three areas of which two are studied, applied in one paper and evaluated in the other.
Check the WJEC specification ↗The 7 subtopics
Each one has its own page.
- Insanity and the M'Naghten RulesM'Naghten test, defect of reason and not knowing that the act was wrong.Open →
- Automatism: insane and non-insaneRecall questions on the internal and external distinction, how complete the loss of control must be, self-induced states, R v Hardie, the burden of proof, and the special verdict.Open →
- Intoxication by alcohol and by drugsRecall questions on the specific and basic intent divide, Majewski, drunken intent, the Dutch courage rule, Kingston on involuntary intoxication, prescribed drugs, and an intoxicated mistake about self-defence.Open →
- Self-defence and the prevention of crimeTwo sources of the defence of self-defence, two questions a jury must answer on self-defence and special rule for householders facing an intruder.Open →
- Duress by threatsDuress by threats, two-stage test for duress and threat will support duress.Open →
- Duress of circumstances and necessityDuress of circumstances and defence of necessity.Open →
- Evaluating the capacity and necessity defencesWhy the internal and external cause distinction is criticised, criticism that the intoxication rules involve a legal fiction and criticism of the specific and basic intent classification.Open →
What you need to know
Answer each one before you reveal it.
In which case was necessity accepted although a death would inevitably follow?
State the M'Naghten test.
Distinguish voluntary from involuntary intoxication.
Is the necessity of force judged subjectively or objectively?
What kind of threat will support duress?
Give one argument for retaining a special verdict for the mentally ill.
What is meant by a defect of reason?
What is the essential difference between insane and non-insane automatism?
Distinguish specific intent from basic intent offences.
Is the amount of force judged subjectively or objectively?
Must the threat be one of immediate harm?
What is duress of circumstances?
Explain the criticism that the intoxication rules involve a legal fiction.
Why is epilepsy classified as insanity in law?
Give three external causes that have supported non-insane automatism.
What happens to a defendant charged with murder who was too drunk to form any intention?
What is the effect of using excessive force in self-defence?
To which offences is duress not available?
How does R v Martin (1989) illustrate duress of circumstances?
Give one argument in defence of the rule in Majewski.
Take Criminal Law: Defences further
The same content, four other ways.
Commonly confused
Pairs that lose marks when they are blurred together.
Self-defence vs Duress by threats
Self-defence: the use of force against the source of the danger. Duress by threats: committing an offence against a third party because someone demanded it.
Duress by threats vs Duress of circumstances
Duress by threats: arising where a person demands the offence be committed. Duress of circumstances: arising where the surrounding situation itself creates the danger.
Duress of circumstances vs Necessity
Duress of circumstances: excusing conduct done under a threat of death or serious injury. Necessity: justifying conduct chosen as the lesser of two evils.
Questions from this topic
Each one with the model answer underneath.
- 1
Where do the rules on insanity as a defence come from?
Model answer
They come from the answers the judges gave to the House of Lords in M'Naghten's Case (1843), after a man who killed the Prime Minister's secretary while deluded was acquitted.
- 2
State the M'Naghten test.
Model answer
At the time of the act the defendant must have been labouring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act, or, if they did know it, not to know that it was wrong.
- 3
What is meant by a defect of reason?
Model answer
The defendant's powers of reasoning must be impaired, so absent-mindedness or confusion in a person who retains the power to reason is not enough.
- 4
What counts as a disease of the mind?
Model answer
It is a legal rather than a medical term, covering any internal condition affecting the faculties of reason, memory and understanding, whether or not the brain itself is diseased.
- 5
How did R v Kemp (1957) widen the disease of the mind?
Model answer
Arteriosclerosis restricting the flow of blood to the brain was held to be a disease of the mind, because the cause of the impairment need not be a mental illness.
- 6
Why is epilepsy classified as insanity in law?
Model answer
R v Sullivan (1984) held that a seizure is an internal cause impairing the mental faculties, so a defendant who injured a man during a fit fell within the M'Naghten Rules.
What is inside Levo
Six ways to work the same material.
Criminal Law: Defences revision questions
- What does Criminal Law: Defences cover in WJEC A-Level Law?
- 7 subtopics: insanity and the m'naghten rules, automatism: insane and non-insane, intoxication by alcohol and by drugs, self-defence and the prevention of crime, duress by threats, duress of circumstances and necessity and evaluating the capacity and necessity defences. Each one has its own page with questions and model answers.
- How is Criminal Law: Defences organised?
- By the WJEC 603-1978-1 specification, subtopic by subtopic, so it matches the order you are taught it in.
Every question in Criminal Law: Defences, 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.