Home
Gary Stringer
Membership
Adult
Junior
Womens
Law
Panic alarms
Weapons
Fighting Back
Club pictures
Instructors
Driving Tips
Club Badge
FAQ's
Contact Us
The Law :      


Under the Law, you are entitled to use ‘reasonable force’ in order to protect yourself, another person or your property, to prevent a crime and or help to legally arrest a criminal.

This law comes from the Common Law and Statute Law. The ‘Common Law’ has always maintained a persons right to self-defence.

The Criminal Code Commission Bill 1897

The following statement accurately described the law on this subject:


“We take one great principle of the common law to be that although it sanctions the defence of a man’s person, liberty and property against illegal violence, and permits the use of force to prevent crimes, to preserve the public peace and to bring offenders to justice, yet all this is subject to the restriction that the force used is necessary; that is the mischief sought to be prevented could not be prevented by less violent means and that the mischief done by, or might reasonably be anticipated from, the force used is not disproportionate to the injury or mischief which it is intended to prevent.”

The basic principles of self-defence are set out in:
(Palmer v R, [1971] A.C 814); see also (Archbold 19-41)

"It is both good law and good sense that a man who is attacked may defend himself. It is both good law and good sense that he may do, but only do, what is reasonably necessary."


Police


The Statute or Criminal Law is covered in Section 3 Criminal Law Act 1967 - Criminal Law Act 1967 (Archbold 19-39)

"A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large." The force that is ‘reasonable’ to use in any situation will dpend on the circumstances at the time and the perceived level of threat you are facing. Broadly, for force to reasonable it must be ‘necessarry’ and in ‘proportion’ to the threat level faced. However, cases have established that:

A claim of self-defence is allowed if you have done no more than you instinctively believe is necessary to protect yourself from attack. (or another person or persons or prioperty); and In that situation you are not expected to judge precisely the measure of defensive force used.

The Law recognises that in the heat of the moment, it may be hard for you to assess the level of danger you face and therefore the amount of force necessarry to protect yourself ot other people. The courts take this into account. The Police and the Crown Prosecution Service also take this into account when deciding whether to bring charges. They will take account of all the circumstances, including whether it is in the public interest to bring charges.

Do I have to wait to be physically assaulted before taking steps to defend myself ?

A common misconception is that a person must first be physically assaulted before resorting to using force to defend themselves from attack. This is not the case and below are rulings made by Judges on the subject of self defence, the use of force and when it may be used.

 

Hammer

Williams v Queen 1984 (Honest belief/mistake as to facts)
Lord Lane said: ‘The test to be applied for self defence is that a person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances as he honestly believed them to be in the defence of himself or another.’

Oatridge 1991
‘An accused who mistakenly believes he is being attacked, may still be able to rely on the defence of self defence’


Chisam 1963

‘A person can use force to ward off an anticipated attack, provided it was anticipated as imminent’


Beckford v Queen 1988 (Self defence)
Lord Griffiths said: ‘A man about to be attacked does not have to wait for his assailant to strike the first blow, or fire the first shot, circumstances may justify a pre-emptive strike’

Palmer v Queen 1971
Lord Morris said: ‘It will be recognised that a person cannot weigh to a nicety the exact measure of his necessary defensive action. If a jury thought in a moment of unexpected anguish a person attacked what he honestly and instinctively thought was necessary, that would be most potent evidence - that only reasonable, defensive action had been taken’


Does a trained person have to warn an attacker before taking steps to defend himself?

Another common misconception that a person who has received training in combat skills is under a duty to warn his attacker of this expertise prior to him taking any physical steps to defend himself. This is not the case. Such a person is treated the same as an untrained person although it is open to a jury to find that because of his training his actions were not reasonable.

 

  Arrest


Disclaimer:
This page is provided for information purposes only; its intention is to provide clarification of the most frequently asked questions of any instructor teaching combat skills “What is the law on self-defence?” The information provided here is freely available from various public sources but must not be regarded as definitive legal advice or acted upon as such. We can accept no responsibility for any actions taken or resulting from the information displayed. Always seek appropriate legal advice from a Solicitor. For more information please see - Crown Prosecution Service http://www.cps.gov.uk