''DPP v Camplin'' (1978) was an

English English usually refers to: * English language * English people English may also refer to: Peoples, culture, and language * ''English'', an adjective for something of, from, or related to England ** English national ide ...

criminal law appeal to the

House of Lords The House of Lords, also known as the House of Peers, is the upper house of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. Membership is by appointment, heredity or official function. Like the House of Commons, it meets in the Palace of Westminste ...

in 1978. Its unanimous judgment helped to define the main limits of defence of

provocation Provocation, provoke or provoked may refer to: * Provocation (legal), a type of legal defense in court which claims the "victim" provoked the accused's actions * Agent provocateur, a (generally political) group that tries to goad a desired res ...

chiefly until Parliament replaced the defence with one of "loss of control" in the Coroners and Justice Act 2009. Its

ratio decidendi ''Ratio decidendi'' ( Latin plural ''rationes decidendi'') is a Latin phrase meaning "the reason" or "the rationale for the decision". The ''ratio decidendi'' is "the point in a case that determines the judgement" or "the principle that the case ...

(main reasoning) continues to have

precedent A precedent is a principle or rule established in a previous legal case that is either binding on or persuasive for a court or other tribunal when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues or facts. Common-law legal systems place great valu ...

value as the new "loss of control" defence is a renaming to avoid creep of the term into scenarios for which it was never intended, above all a blurring with

diminished responsibility In criminal law, diminished responsibility (or diminished capacity) is a potential defense by excuse by which defendants argue that although they broke the law, they should not be held fully criminally liable for doing so, as their mental func ...

Facts of the case

The defendant at trial, Camplin, was 15 years old at the time of the offence. He killed Mohammed Lal Khan by hitting him on the head with a

chapati Chapati (alternatively spelled chapatti, chappati, chapathi, or chappathi; pronounced as IAST: ), also known as ''roti'', ''rotli'', ''safati'', ''shabaati'', ''phulka'', (in East Africa) ''chapo'', (in Marathi) ''poli'', and (in the Maldives) ...

pan following Khan having sex with him non-consensually (then referred to as buggery) and then laughing at him.

Decision

The jury weighed up the evidence and convicted Camplin of murder. He appealed contending the judge was wrong to direct the jury that age was irrelevant as to his defence of provocation. The appeal was allowed (confirming it could be relevant). The issue at the heart of the Camplin case is whether the "reasonable man" test by numerous

s laid out for the defence of provocation was one which matched the characteristics of the defendant or whether it ought to be confined to the characteristics of the "adult male". Lord Diplock noted that the "reasonable man" was: Lord Diplock noted that in the facts before the court, the age of the defendant was "a characteristic which may have its effects on temperament as well as physique". The House of Lords agreed with a previous Court of Appeal judgment which found that it was wrong for the trial judge to have instructed the jury to not consider the defendant's age (or sex) when deciding whether he had been provoked.

Key citations of this case

* Applied in ''R v Graham''

982 Year 982 ( CMLXXXII) was a common year starting on Sunday (link will display the full calendar) of the Julian calendar. Events By place Europe * Summer – Emperor Otto II (the Red) assembles an imperial expeditionary force at Tar ...

1 All ER 801 ** Approving ''per curiam ratio'' that made relevant personal characteristics of sex and age. The same was part of this case's ''ratio'' in its final appeal namely as to

duress Coercion () is compelling a party to act in an involuntary manner by the use of threats, including threats to use force against a party. It involves a set of forceful actions which violate the free will of an individual in order to induce a desi ...

and the duty to act reasonably if under duress.

Footnotes and references

;Notes ;References {{Reflist English criminal case law House of Lords cases 1978 in case law 1978 in British law