Explanation:

The 'Mignonette Case' is a landmark English criminal law case that is widely studied for its profound implications on the defense of necessity, particularly in cases of murder. The case presents a harrowing factual scenario that forced the courts to grapple with complex moral and legal dilemmas. Let's analyze the options: * **Option (1) Queen Vs. Dudley and Stephens:** This is the correct answer. The case of *Regina v. Dudley and Stephens* (1884) is famously known as the 'Mignonette Case'. The facts involved four crew members of the yacht Mignonette who were shipwrecked and adrift in a lifeboat for several days. Facing starvation, two of the crew members, Thomas Dudley and Edwin Stephens, decided to kill and eat the youngest crew member, Richard Parker, a 17-year-old cabin boy, who was already weak and near death. They did this to save their own lives and the life of another crew member. Upon rescue, they were charged with murder. The court, in a highly influential judgment, rejected the defense of necessity for murder, establishing that one cannot take another's life to save one's own, even in extreme circumstances. This case remains a cornerstone of criminal jurisprudence regarding the limits of self-preservation as a legal defense. * **Option (2) R Vs. Robinson:** This case, *R v. Robinson* (1977), is an English criminal law case related to theft and the defense of honest belief. It is not associated with the Mignonette incident or the doctrine of necessity in murder. Therefore, this option is incorrect. * **Option (3) R Vs. Lipman:** The case of *R v. Lipman* (1970) is an important English case concerning involuntary manslaughter and self-induced intoxication. The defendant killed his girlfriend while under the influence of LSD. The case explored the relationship between intoxication and mens rea. It is unrelated to the Mignonette Case. Therefore, this option is incorrect. * **Option (4) R Vs. Hudson:** The case of *R v. Hudson* (1971) is an English criminal law case dealing with the defense of duress. The defendants were charged with perjury and claimed they committed the offense because they were threatened with violence. This case is distinct from the Mignonette Case and its legal principles. Therefore, this option is incorrect. In conclusion, the 'Mignonette Case' is unequivocally identified with *Queen v. Dudley and Stephens*, a seminal case on the defense of necessity in murder.