Collins v Secretary of State for Justice is a case that deals with the legality of the

"householder defense" in cases of self-defense. The "householder defense" is a common

law doctrine that allows homeowners to use reasonable force to defend themselves and
their property against intruders.
The case was brought by Mr. Collins, who had been convicted of manslaughter for killing a
burglar who had broken into his home. Mr. Collins argued that he had acted in self-defense
and was entitled to the protection of the "householder defense". The court held that the
"householder defense" was not a separate defense but a reflection of the wider
principles of self-defense. Therefore, the same principles of reasonable force and
proportionality applied to both scenarios.
The court also held that the use of force must be considered in the context of the
situation as a whole and that homeowners cannot rely on preconceived ideas or
stereotypes about burglars or intruders. In other words, the court held that a person using
the "householder defense" cannot simply assume that an intruder is a violent criminal and
use any amount of force they deem necessary to protect their property. Instead, the court
emphasized the importance of considering the specific circumstances of the situation, such
as the level of threat posed by the intruder and the amount of force needed to neutralize
that threat.
In this case according to the court's findings, Mr. Collins used the "sleeper hold" on
the intruder, who was a much smaller man and had already been subdued by Mr.
Collins. The "sleeper hold" is a grappling technique that restricts blood flow to the brain
and can cause an individual to lose consciousness. Mr. Collins knew how to execute it since
he was trained in martial arts.
The court found that the use of the "sleeper hold" was excessive force and was not
necessary or proportionate to the threat posed by the intruder at that point. Moreover, they
also noted that Mr. Collins had continued to apply the "sleeper hold" for an
extended period of time after the intruder had lost consciousness and had failed
to seek medical assistance for the intruder. These factors contributed to the court's finding
that Mr. Collins had used excessive force and was not entitled to the protection of the
"householder defense."
Ultimately, his conviction for manslaughter was upheld. The case established that
the "householder defense" does not provide blanket immunity for
homeowners who use force against intruders but requires a careful assessment of the
circumstances and the proportionality of the force used.