Logourl black
From our private database of 13,800+ case briefs...

Director of Public Prosecutions v. Camplin

House of Lords
2 All Eng.Rep. 168 (1978)


Facts

Mohammed Lal Khan, a middle-aged man, sodomized Camplin (defendant), a 15-year-old boy, in Kahn’s home and then laughed at him. Camplin thereafter took a heavy kitchen pan and killed Khan. Camplin was charged with murder. At trial, Camplin presented a defense of provocation in an attempt to reduce the offense to manslaughter. Camplin testified that despite his objections, Khan sexually abused him and then ridiculed him. Camplin said he then lost control and struck and killed Khan with the pan. Over defense counsel’s objections, the trial court instructed the jury that they were to consider whether the provocation was sufficient to make a reasonable man, in like circumstances, act as Camplin did and not use the standard of a reasonable person of Camplin’s age. Camplin was convicted and he appealed. The court of appeal, criminal division, allowed the appeal and vacated the murder conviction. In its place, the appellate court imposed a conviction of manslaughter on the ground that the trial court’s instruction to the jury regarding the “reasonable man” test was in error. The House of Lords then agreed to review the case.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (Diplock, L.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Concurrence (Simon, L.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 170,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.