## Facts

- The case of R v Graham established a framework for the defense of duress of circumstances in criminal law.
- Duress of circumstances arises when an individual commits an offense to avoid a perceived imminent threat of death or serious injury, without a specific demand from another person.
- The courts have developed a two-stage test in R v Graham [1982] 1 All ER 801, applied in subsequent cases such as R v Martin [1989] 1 All ER 652 and R v Howe [1987] AC 417.
- In R v Martin, the defendant drove while disqualified because his wife threatened to commit suicide if he did not drive their son to work; the court considered whether this threat constituted duress.

## Issues

1. Whether the defense of duress of circumstances requires both a subjective perception of an imminent threat and an objective reasonableness in response.
2. Whether a threat of suicide by another person can amount to a threat of death or serious injury for the purposes of duress of circumstances.
3. How duress of circumstances differs from duress by direct threats.
4. What are the limitations and exclusions applicable to the defense of duress of circumstances.

## Decision

- The courts affirmed the two-stage test for duress of circumstances: (1) the defendant must genuinely believe in an imminent threat of death or serious injury (subjective test); and (2) a sober person of reasonable firmness would have acted similarly in such circumstances (objective test).
- In Martin, the court held that the threat of suicide could constitute a sufficient threat of death or serious injury, satisfying the first limb of the Graham test.
- The objective test in Martin focused on whether a reasonable person sharing the defendant’s characteristics would have responded as the defendant did, considering the immediacy and gravity of the threat.
- The defense of duress of circumstances was distinguished from duress by direct threats, emphasizing that the former stems from circumstances rather than explicit demands.
- The defense is limited and unavailable for offenses such as murder, attempted murder, and certain treason offenses, and is only applicable where the threat is immediate.

## Legal Principles

- Duress of circumstances is grounded in the principle that individuals should not be criminally liable when their will is overborne by a threat of immediate harm.
- The two-stage test (as derived from R v Graham) requires both a genuine belief in immediate harm and a response that meets the standard of a reasonable person.
- Threats of suicide can amount to threats of death or serious injury.
- The distinction between duress of circumstances and duress by threats lies in the source of compulsion: external circumstances versus direct threats.
- The defense does not apply to murder, attempted murder, certain forms of treason, or where the threat is not immediate.

## Conclusion

R v Graham established the key two-stage test for duress of circumstances, requiring both subjective belief in imminent threat and objective reasonableness of response. This framework, affirmed and applied in cases such as Martin, clarified the scope, limitations, and distinction of this defense within criminal law.
