The Queen v. Martin
House of Lords
[1997] UKHL 56, [1998] A.C. 917 (1997, 1998)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
Alan Martin (defendant) was a juvenile who lived with his family while his father, a British servicemember, was stationed in Germany. While in Germany, Martin was accused of murdering a civilian. The German police conducted the initial investigation. However, the German government later waived its right to prosecute the case, and British military authorities (plaintiffs) charged Martin with the murder. Martin’s father returned to England and was discharged from military service while the murder charges were pending. After Martin’s father was discharged and Martin and his father were both civilians, the British military tried the murder charges by court-martial in Germany. Most of the witnesses lived in Germany and could not be forced to testify anywhere outside of Germany. Martin was convicted of murder. Martin appealed to the British Courts-Martial Appeal Court, which upheld the conviction. Martin then appealed to the House of Lords, arguing that trying a young civilian in a court-martial without the procedural protections provided by a civilian court was such an unfair and oppressive procedure that it was an abuse of process, i.e., a violation of an accused person’s rights to due process and fair procedures.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lloyd, J.)
Concurrence (Clyde, J.)
Concurrence (Hope, J.)
Concurrence (Slynn, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 834,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,600 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
