In the rule that necessity might be a defence to a criminal charge, the distinction was drawn between threats directed against the person and threats upon property. ‘The only force that doth excuse is a force upon the person, and present fear of death ; and this force and fear must continue all the time the party remains with the rebels. It is incumbent on every man, who makes force his defence, to show an actual force, and that he quitted the service as soon as he could.’
 Fost 13,  EngR 782, (1746) Fost 13, (1746) 168 ER 8
Cited – Attorney-General v Whelan 20-Dec-1933
(Court of Criminal Appeal – Ireland) The appellant had been tried as part of a conspiracy to steal and to receive stolen good. He was acquitted of the conspiracy, but now appealed against his conviction for theft despite his assertion that he acted . .
Cited – Hasan, Regina v HL 17-Mar-2005
The House was asked two questions: the meaning of ‘confession’ for the purposes of section 76(1) of the 1984 Act, and as to the defence of duress. The defendant had been involved in burglary, being told his family would be harmed if he refused. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.213663