## Facts

- The case concerned a decision not to prosecute a homeowner (“B”) who caused serious head injuries to an intruder, Collins, during a nighttime struggle in the homeowner’s kitchen.
- Collins, affected by drugs and alcohol, had entered B’s home illegally.
- Collins claimed that B’s use of force exceeded lawful boundaries in detaining or defending against him.

## Issues

1. Whether section 76 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 provides broader protection to homeowners using force against intruders.
2. Whether force exceeding what is strictly required, but not grossly disproportionate, is unlawful in the context of home defense.
3. How courts should assess the effect of immediate fear and stress on a homeowner’s decision to use force.

## Decision

- The High Court held that force used by a homeowner is not unlawful solely because it is more than strictly necessary; it must be grossly disproportionate to lose protection under section 76.
- The court recognized greater latitude for homeowners in home defense compared to other self-defense situations, due to the circumstances of fear and urgency.
- The test for “grossly disproportionate” force must consider the specific circumstances the homeowner faced, including their stress and fear at the time of the incident.

## Legal Principles

- Section 76 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 allows some leeway for homeowners using force against intruders, provided the force is not grossly disproportionate.
- The rationale for this standard acknowledges the high stress and immediacy of home defense situations.
- Precedents such as Attorney General's Reference No 2 of 1983 [1984] QB 456 and later R v Ray [2017] EWCA Crim 1391 recognize the distinction between anticipatory and defensive force, maintaining consistency in applying the “grossly disproportionate” test.
- Courts must evaluate actions in context, including the homeowner’s perception and urgency during the incident.

## Conclusion

R (Collins) v Secretary of State for Justice [2016] EWHC 33 (Admin) clarified that homeowners are permitted a wider margin of permissible force against intruders: only grossly disproportionate acts fall outside the protection of section 76 CJIA 2008. The case ensures legal standards reflect the realities of defending one’s home and provides clear guidance for courts, police, and the public on lawful home defense.
