R v Hasan [2005] UKHL 22

Facts

  • The case concerned the scope and application of the defense of duress in English criminal law.
  • Hasan was involved in a criminal enterprise and claimed to have acted under duress due to threats of death or serious injury.
  • The House of Lords reviewed the necessary conditions for a successful duress defense, including the immediacy and specificity of threats, reasonable belief in their execution, and the significance of prior association with criminals.

Issues

  1. Whether the defense of duress is available where the defendant voluntarily associates with known criminals and could foresee coercion.
  2. Whether the test for duress is to be assessed objectively, focusing on what a reasonable person of the defendant’s characteristics would have done.
  3. Whether the threat relied on must be immediate, specific, and directly linked to the crime committed.
  4. Whether the defense is precluded if the defendant had a reasonable opportunity to escape the threat.

Decision

  • The House of Lords held that duress is not available where the defendant foresaw, or should have foreseen, the risk of being compelled to commit a crime due to voluntary association with criminals.
  • The objective test of reasonableness applies: a sober person of reasonable firmness, sharing certain relevant characteristics (like age or serious disability), must be considered—not traits like timidity.
  • The threat relied upon must be imminent and directly related to the specific offence committed; broad or distant threats are insufficient.
  • The defense cannot apply where the defendant had a reasonable opportunity to evade or escape the threat.

Legal Principles

  • The defense of duress requires an immediate and specific threat of serious harm directly compelling the offence.
  • Only relevant personal characteristics affecting resistance to threats may be considered in the objective test.
  • Voluntary association with criminals, where coercion is or should be foreseeable, excludes reliance on duress.
  • If a defendant could reasonably escape the coercion, the defense is not available.

Conclusion

R v Hasan significantly restricts the defense of duress, mandating an objective standard, strict immediacy and specificity of threats, and denying the defense to those who voluntarily involve themselves with criminals and foresee coercion. The case remains central to the modern application of the duress doctrine in English criminal law.

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