​KembaraXtra-Case Law-R v Martin (1989)-Defence of Necessity (Duress of Circumstances) I. Introduction to the Defence of Necessity

• English law, in exceptionally limited situations, acknowledges a defence of necessity.
• This defence acknowledges that an individual may be compelled to act unlawfully to prevent a greater harm.

II. Types of Necessity

• Duress (Pressure from Another's Wrongful Conduct):
  • The most frequent manifestation of necessity.
  • Arises from wrongful threats or violence exerted by another person upon the accused's will.
• Duress of Circumstances (Pressure from Objective Dangers):
  • An equally valid form of necessity.
  • Arises from objective dangers that threaten the accused or others.
  • This is conveniently termed 'duress of circumstances'.

III. Key Holding in R v Martin (1989)

• Per Simon Brown J: English law does recognise a defence of necessity, but only in extreme circumstances.
• This defence can arise not only from the direct wrongful actions of another (duress) but also from the pressure of unavoidable, objective dangers (duress of circumstances).

IV. Essential Elements to Understand for Study:

• Rarity: The defence of necessity is not a general excuse for unlawful actions; it is reserved for truly exceptional situations.
• Causation: The unlawful act must be a direct consequence of the pressure (either from another person or objective circumstances).
• Proportionality: The harm avoided must be significantly greater than the harm caused by the unlawful act. (This element is implied by the concept of "extreme circumstances" and the aim to prevent a "greater harm").
• Imminence: The threat or danger must be immediate or imminent. (This is a common characteristic of duress and necessity defences and should be considered).

V. Areas for Further Consideration/Application:

• In what specific scenarios could 'duress of circumstances' realistically arise? Think about situations where there is no immediate human threat but an overwhelming environmental or situational danger.
• How would a court distinguish between a genuine defence of necessity and a voluntary assumption of risk or a convenient excuse?
• Consider the potential overlap and distinctions between the defence of duress and duress of circumstances.

Study Tip: When revising this, try to recall real-world or hypothetical scenarios where someone might feel compelled to break the law due to extreme circumstances. Ask yourself: "Was this an 'extreme circumstance' where the harm avoided was clearly greater than the harm caus