Two shipwrecked sailors killed and ate their teenage cabin boy to survive at sea, then were charged with murder upon rescue. The court rejected the defence of necessity, establishing that necessity cannot justify taking an innocent life.

Economic duress: illegitimate pressure without practical choice makes contracts voidable.

This Supreme Court case established a new test for dishonesty in criminal law, overruling the subjective element of the Ghosh test. The case arose from a professional gambler's civil claim against a casino after being accused of cheating at baccarat through edge-sorting.

R v Ghosh established the test for dishonesty in criminal law, requiring both objective and subjective elements. The case created a two-stage test that was fundamental to determining dishonesty in fraud and theft cases until the Supreme Court replaced its subjective second limb with a wholly objective test in Ivey v Genting Casinos [2017] UKSC 67.

Economic duress established where illegitimate pressure leaves no practical alternative choice

This case established the fundamental test for the insanity defence in English criminal law. The defendant shot the Prime Minister's secretary believing he was being persecuted by the government.

Threats of criminal prosecution constitute duress rendering contracts voidable

A key case establishing the limitations of transferred malice where the type of harm differs from that intended. The defendant threw a stone intending to hit people but broke a window instead.

Presumed undue influence requires manifest disadvantage and relationship of trust and confidence.

Lawful commercial threats cannot normally constitute economic duress despite business pressure

A Victorian case where a man deceived a woman into having sexual intercourse by pretending it was a medical procedure. The court held that deception as to the nature of the act vitiates consent.

Undue influence can be presumed in relationships of trust but delay may bar relief.

R v Pittwood established that a person can be criminally liable for omissions where they have undertaken a duty of care. A railway gatekeeper who failed to close level crossing gates, resulting in a fatal collision, was convicted of manslaughter despite not having actively caused the death.

R v Latimer established the doctrine of transferred malice in criminal law, where a defendant's intention to harm one person can be transferred to make them liable for actually harming another person. This case is fundamental to understanding how criminal intent operates when the actual victim differs from the intended victim.

Undue influence requires transaction shown to be manifestly disadvantageous to complainant

R v White established that causation in criminal law requires the defendant's act to be a factual cause of the prohibited result. White attempted to poison his mother but she died of a heart attack before the poison could take effect, breaking the chain of causation and resulting in conviction only for attempt.

Actual undue influence does not require manifest disadvantage or put banks on notice.

R v Gibbins and Proctor established that a person can be criminally liable for murder by omission where they have a duty to act but fail to do so. The case involved a father and his partner who failed to feed the father's child, resulting in the child's death from starvation.

The House of Lords established the fundamental principles governing intoxication as a defence in criminal law, distinguishing between crimes of specific and basic intent and setting rules for when intoxication can negate mens rea.

House of Lords rules duress cannot excuse murder or attempted murder

A foundational case establishing the test for gross negligence manslaughter, requiring negligence so gross that it amounts to a crime and merits criminal punishment rather than mere civil liability.

Court of Appeal establishes definitive two-stage test for duress defence

Woolmington v DPP established the fundamental principle that the prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in criminal cases. The case overturned the previous rule that required defendants to prove their innocence when claiming self-defence in murder cases.

Banks have constructive notice of undue influence when wives guarantee husbands' debts.

Steane, a British actor, made propaganda broadcasts for Germany during WWII to protect his family from a concentration camp. The Court of Appeal held that for the offence of doing acts likely to assist the enemy with intent to assist the enemy, the prosecution must prove the accused intended to assist the enemy, not merely that he intended to do the acts.

Introduced inequality of bargaining power as overarching principle in unconscionable transactions.

Voluntary participation in violent gangs precludes duress defense for subsequent crimes.

This case established that a duty of care in criminal law can arise from voluntary assumption of responsibility for a vulnerable person. Stone and Dobinson were convicted of manslaughter after Stone's sister died from malnutrition while living in their care, despite their failure to seek adequate medical help.

Commercial agreements presumed to create legal relations despite 'ex gratia' descriptions.

Two defendants entered a house with permission but exceeded that permission with intent to steal, establishing the boundaries of trespassory burglary.

Unfair prejudice requires breach of legitimate expectations based on actual agreements or understandings.

House of Lords case establishing key principles of joint enterprise liability. The case clarified when secondary parties can be liable for crimes committed by principals that go beyond the originally contemplated joint venture.

Onerous exclusion clauses need special notice - the more unusual, the greater the notice required.

House of Lords case establishing that foresight of consequences is evidence of intention but not equivalent to intention itself in murder cases.

Courts can strike down unconscionable mortgage terms beyond traditional penalty clauses

Company secretaries have ostensible authority to bind companies in administrative matters.

House of Lords case establishing that defendants can be convicted of unlawful act manslaughter without foreseeing that their act might cause harm, provided the act was intentional, unlawful and dangerous.

Judges cannot decide cases where they have any financial interest whatsoever.

House of Lords case dealing with impossibility in criminal attempts, which was later overruled by Shivpuri. The defendant was acquitted of attempted handling of stolen goods where the goods were not actually stolen.

Reasonable person test includes age and relevant characteristics affecting gravity of provocation.

Unreasonable victim reaction can break causation if unforeseeable and unreasonable.

Hidden vulnerabilities don't make unlawful act dangerous if unforeseeable to reasonable person

Agreements to negotiate in good faith are unenforceable due to uncertainty.

Court establishes classic definition of consideration requiring benefit or detriment