Bullard v The Queen

JurisdictionUK Non-devolved
CourtPrivy Council
Judgment Date1957
Year1957
Date1957

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
196 cases
  • R v Coutts (Graham James)
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 19 July 2006
    ...House in Mancini v DPP [1942] AC 1, 7-8. It was again cited with approval by Lord Tucker, giving the reasons of the Privy Council in Bullard v The Queen [1957] AC 635, 642, who held that it had "long been settled law that if on the evidence, whether of the prosecution or of the defence, th......
  • Chen Fan Chiang v PP
    • Malaysia
    • Court of Appeal (Malaysia)
    • Invalid date
  • R v Cambridge
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 14 February 1994
    ...of manslaughter. THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE 24 THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICEHopper (1915) 2 KB 431, Mancini v DPP (1942) 28 Cr App R 65, and Bullard (1957) 42 Cr App R 1. In Porrit (1961) 45 Cr App R 65, this court approved a passage from the opinion of the Privy Council in Bullard, delivered by Lord ......
  • R v Porritt
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Criminal Appeal
    • Invalid date
  • Get Started for Free
6 books & journal articles
  • Descent into Murder: Provocation's Stricture—The Prognosis for Women Who Kill Men Who Abuse Them
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Journal of Criminal Law, The No. 71-4, August 2007
    • 1 August 2007
    ...Fazal Mohammed v The State [1990] 2 AC 320 at332.) There must be some evidence, but of what strength? In Bullard v R[1961] 3 All ER 470n, [1957] AC 635 the phrase used was, ‘any evidence. . . fit to be left to a jury’. It is true that in DPP v Camplin Lord Diplock usedthe phrase ‘however sl......
  • Codifying the Law on Evidential Burdens
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Journal of Criminal Law, The No. 72-4, August 2008
    • 1 August 2008
    ...example, evidence adducedby the prosecution in support of a charge of ‘murder’ may suggest a defence ofprovocation. Also see Bullard v R [1957] AC 635 at 642 and Palmer v R [1971] AC814 at 823.22 R v Lang and Deadman [2002] EWCA Crim 298 at [31], per Pitchford J.Codifying the Law on Evident......
  • Anger and Fear as Justifiable Preludes for Loss of Self-Control
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Journal of Criminal Law, The No. 74-3, June 2010
    • 1 June 2010
    ...judge the power to determinewhether he thinks there is any evidence from which a jury could85 R v Smith (Rocky) [2009] EWCA Crim 2461.86 [1957] AC 635.87 (1992) 95 Cr App R 326.88 [2003] EWCA Crim 3486.Anger and Fear as Justif‌iable Preludes for Loss of reasonably conclude that there was lo......
  • The presumption of jury competence: Sarrazin's new acknowledgment of cognitive biases and its implications for counsel.
    • Canada
    • University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review Vol. 71 No. 2, March - March - March 2013
    • 22 March 2013
    ...Ibid, citing Jackson, supra note 73 at 588. (77) Sarrazin, supra note 4 at para 50, citing Gilbert, supra note 5; Bullard v The Queen, [1957] AC 635 (PC), 3 WLR 656; R v Coutts, [2006] UKHL 39, [2006] 4 All ER (78) Sarrazin, supra note 4 at para 53 [emphasis added]. (79) See ibid at para 54......
  • Get Started for Free