Trial·Breaker SQE1
SQE1 › FLK2 › Criminal Law and Practice › General defences
SQE1 · FLK2 · Criminal Law and Practice

General defences — SQE1 Criminal question

A worked single-best-answer question on general defences, with why each wrong option is wrong — the way SQE1 traps candidates.

General defences

Eric, who was sober, was walking home late at night when a man approached him quickly holding a long object. Eric honestly believed the man was about to hit him with a baseball bat, although it was in fact a rolled-up umbrella and most people would have recognised it as such. Eric punched the man once, breaking his nose. Eric is charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm and relies on self-defence.

Which of the following best describes how self-defence applies?

  1. AEric cannot rely on self-defence, because his belief that he was under attack was unreasonable.
  2. BEric cannot rely on self-defence, because he should have tried to walk away first.
  3. CEric can rely on self-defence only if the man had actually struck him first.
  4. DEric can rely on self-defence only if his force was not grossly disproportionate.
  5. EEric is to be judged on the facts as he honestly believed them to be, and has a defence if a single punch was reasonable force in those believed circumstances.
Show answer and reasoning
E is the best answer. The reasonableness of force is decided by reference to the circumstances as the defendant genuinely believed them to be, whether or not the belief was mistaken or reasonable (Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, s 76(3)-(4); R v Gladstone Williams). The reasonableness of the belief is relevant only to whether it was genuinely held. Eric was sober, so s 76(5) on voluntary intoxication does not apply.

Rule: In self-defence the defendant is judged on the facts as he honestly believed them to be, and the force used must be reasonable in those believed circumstances.

  • A A mistaken belief need only be honestly held; its unreasonableness goes only to whether it was genuine. (wrong rule)
  • B There is no duty to retreat; the possibility of retreat is merely a factor in assessing reasonableness (s 76(6A)). (wrong rule)
  • C A person may use pre-emptive force against an attack he honestly believes is imminent. (wrong rule)
  • D The 'grossly disproportionate' test applies only to householder cases; elsewhere the force must be reasonable. (right rule, wrong facts)

Source: Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, s 76; R v Gladstone Williams (1984) 78 Cr App R 276

Practise more Criminal Law and Practice   All Criminal subtopics