R v Brennan [2014] EWCA Crim 2387

Facts

  • The case concerned the application of the diminished responsibility defence under section 2(1) of the Homicide Act 1957 as amended by the Coroners and Justice Act 2009.
  • The defence requires proof of a "disruption in mental functioning" from a "recognized medical condition" that significantly impairs the defendant’s abilities.
  • Psychiatric analysis was central to establishing the presence and impact of such mental disruption.
  • The psychiatric evidence in Brennan was unchallenged by the prosecution.
  • The judge was asked to consider if the murder charge should be withdrawn in light of the uncontested evidence.

Issues

  1. Whether unchallenged psychiatric evidence supporting diminished responsibility obligates the judge to withdraw a murder charge in the absence of opposing evidence.
  2. How judges and juries should assess the strength and relevance of uncontested expert psychiatric evidence.
  3. To what extent defining a "mental disruption" and assessing "significant impairment" are clinical or legal matters.

Decision

  • The Court of Appeal ruled that unchallenged psychiatric evidence which supports diminished responsibility, and is not controverted by other material, requires the judge to withdraw the murder charge.
  • The court emphasized that agreed and relevant expert evidence should not be disregarded by juries without clear reasons.
  • Judges must assess uncontested expert evidence for clarity, logic, and consistency, and verify its relevance and reliability.
  • The ultimate determination of "significant impairment" remains for the jury, even when expert evidence is unchallenged.

Legal Principles

  • Identifying mental disruption is fundamentally a medical (clinical) question best determined by psychiatrists.
  • The legal standard for diminished responsibility involves both medical assessment and jury evaluation of impairment.
  • Judicial duty includes evaluating the validity and applicability of expert testimony and determining its sufficiency for dismissing the murder charge.
  • Juries retain the final decision on whether the legal criteria for diminished responsibility are satisfied, regardless of medical consensus.

Conclusion

R v Brennan establishes a structured approach to evaluating unchallenged psychiatric evidence in diminished responsibility cases, clarifying the roles of judges, experts, and juries to ensure fair and consistent application of the defence while maintaining ultimate jury authority.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal