Southern Portland Cement Ltd -v- Cooper; PC 1974

Since the duty of an occupier towards a trespasser was based not on the relationship forced upon him but on consideration of humanity, the occupiers duty only arose if he had knowledge or had created the danger on his land; that no unreasonable burden was to be placed on an occupier and accordingly an occupier was entitled to consider all the disadvantages to himself in taking action for the protection of trespassers and weigh them against the degree of likelihood of trespassers and the degree of hidden or unexpected danger to which trespassers may be exposed: ‘If the occupier creates the danger when he knows that there is a chance that trespassers will come that way and will not see or realise the danger he may have to do more. There may be difficult cases where the occupier will be hampered in the conduct of his own affairs if he has to take elaborate precautions. But in the present case it would have been easy to prevent the development of the dangerous situation which caused the plaintiff’s injuries. The more serious the danger the greater is the obligation to avoid it. And if the dangerous thing or something near it is an allurement to children that may greatly increase the chance that children will come there.
Next comes the question to whom does the occupier owe a duty. Their Lordships have already rejected the view that no duty is owed unless the advent of a trespasser is extremely probable. It was argued that the duty could be limited to cases where the coming of trespassers is more probable than not’
Lord Reid said: ‘ Next comes the question to whom does the occupier owe a duty. Their Lordships have already rejected the view that no duty is owed unless the advent of a trespasser is extremely probable. It was argued that the duty could be limited to cases where the coming of trespassers is more probable than not. Their Lordships can find neither principle nor authority nor any practical reason to justify such a limitation. The only rational or practical answer would seem to be that the occupier is entitled to neglect a bare possibility that trespassers may come to a particular place on his land but is bound at least to give consideration to the matter when he knows facts which show a substantial chance that they may come there.’

Court: PC
Date: 01-Jan-1974
Judges: Lord Reid
References: [1974] AC 623, [1974] 2 WLR 152, [1974] 1 All ER 87
Cited By:
  • Rose -v- Plenty, CA, Cited, ([1976] 1 WLR 141, Bailii, [1975] EWCA Civ 5, [1976] 1 All ER 97, [1975] ICR 430)

Comments Off

Filed under Land, Torts - Other

Grieve -v- Douglas-Home; SCS 23-Dec-1964

(Election Court)

Court: SCS
Date: 23-Dec-1964
Judges: Lord Migdale
Links: Bailii,
References: [1964] ScotCS 3, 1965 SC 315, 1965 SLT 186
Cited By:

Comments Off

Filed under Elections, Scotland

The Land Commissioner -v- Vasara Pinto Jayewardene and Another; PC 27-Jul-1960

(Ceylon)

Court: PC
Date: 27-Jul-1960
Links: Bailii,
References: [1960] UKPC 27,

Comments Off

Filed under Commonwealth

Cyril Waugh (Reasons) -v- The King; PC 16-Dec-1949

(Jamaica)

Court: PC
Date: 16-Dec-1949
Links: Bailii,
References: [1949] UKPC 81,

Comments Off

Filed under Commonwealth

Maung Kyi Oh and Another -v- Ma Thet Pon; PC 28-Jan-1926

Rangoon

Court: PC
Date: 28-Jan-1926
Links: Bailii,
References: [1926] UKPC 4,

Comments Off

Filed under Commonwealth

Qaza, Regina (on The Application of) -v- Secretary of State for The Home Department; Admn 20-Aug-2014

The claimant sought judicial review to challenge what he said was his unlawful detention pending removal.

Court: Admn
Date: 20-Aug-2014
Judges: Timothy Brennan QC
Links: Bailii,
References: [2014] EWHC 2851 (Admin),

Comments Off

Filed under Immigration, Torts - Other

Hamilton -v- Nortel Networks UK Ltd (In Administration); NIIT 20-Jan-2011

Court: NIIT
Date: 20-Jan-2011
Links: Bailii,
References: [2011] NIIT 321_10IT,

Comments Off

Filed under Employment, Northern Ireland

Unite & Others -v- Nortel Networks UK Limited (In adninistration); NIIT 11-Jun-2010

Court: NIIT
Date: 11-Jun-2010
Links: Bailii,
References: [2010] NIIT 6445_09IT,

Comments Off

Filed under Employment, Northern Ireland

Regina -v- Briggs (Joan); CACD 12-Dec-2003

The defendant appealed her conviction for theft. She had involved herself in the sale of an elderly relatives house and arranged for a new house to be bought in her and another name.
Held: Hilton was to be distinguished. There, the defendant had carried out a clear act of misappropriation. Here the owner had been deceived into parting with ownership. No case could be found where the act of approriation was the act of the victim. If it was a theft, there would be less theoretical need for the several varieties of deception. The word appropriation connotes a physical act. Since the prosecution had explicitly chosen not to allow a charge of deception, it would not now be allowed to substitute such a charge.

Court: CACD
Date: 12-Dec-2003
Judges: Judge LJ, Silber Cox JJ
Statutes: Theft Act 1968 3(1)
References: Times, 17-Dec-2003,
Cases Cited:

Comments Off

Filed under Crime

Hammond -v- Mitchell; 1992

The court described the process of deducing what were the intentions of the parties when purchasing property: ‘The primary emphasis accorded by the law in cases of this kind to express discussions between the parties (‘however imperfectly remembered and however imprecise their terms’) means that the tenderest exchanges of a common law courtship may assume an unforeseen significance many years later when they are brought under equity’s microscope and subjected to an analysis under which many thousands of pounds of value may be liable to turn on fine questions as to whether the relevant words were spoken in earnest or in dalliance and with or without representational intent.’

Date: 01-Jan-1992
Judges: Waite J
References: [1992] 2 All ER 109, [1991] 1 WLR 1127

Comments Off

Filed under Family, Trusts

Bloom and Others -v- The Pensions Regulator (Nortel, Re); ChD 10-Dec-2010

Applications for directions by the administrators of twenty companies in two groups, all raising the same common questions as to the effect of the Financial Support Direction regime created by the Pensions Act 2004 upon companies in administration or insolvent liquidation.

Court: ChD
Date: 10-Dec-2010
Judges: Briggs J
Statutes: Pensions Act 2004
Links: Bailii,
References: [2010] EWHC 3010 (Ch), [2011] BCC 277, [2011] Pens LR 37
Cited By:

Comments Off

Filed under Financial Services, Insolvency

In re R (A Child) (Inadequate Welfare Evidence); FC 6-Aug-2014

Application for care order – ‘an example of what happens where inadequate welfare evidence is filed and where case law and statutory authority are ignored.’

Court: FC
Date: 06-Aug-2014
Judges: Wildblood QC HHJ
Links: Bailii,
References: [2014] EWFC B101,

Comments Off

Filed under Children, Litigation Practice

Harrison -v- Madejski and Another; CA 28-Mar-2014

Court: CA
Date: 28-Mar-2014
Links: Bailii,
References: [2014] EWCA Civ 361,
Cases Cited:

Comments Off

Filed under Contract

Aspinalls Club Ltd -v- Revenue & Customs; FTTTx 17-May-2011

FTTTx Gaming duty — section 11 Finance Act 1997 — ‘banker’s profits’ — whether commissions and rebates to be taken into account in calculating ‘banker’s profits’

Court: FTTTx
Date: 17-May-2011
Statutes: Finance Act 1997 11
Links: Bailii,
References: [2011] UKFTT 325 (TC),
Cited By:

Comments Off

Filed under Taxes - Other

Anglo Petroleum Ltd and Another -v- TFB (Mortgages) Ltd; CA 16-May-2007

Challenge to validity of mortgages executed by company – allegation that funds used for financial assistance in purchase of own shares – effect on loan.
Toulson LJ discussed the case of Waugh v Morris, saying: ‘

Court: CA
Date: 16-May-2007
Judges: Mummery, Smith, Toulson LJJ
Statutes: Companies Act 1985 151
Links: Bailii,
References: [2007] EWCA Civ 456,
Cited By:

Comments Off

Filed under Company, Contract

Sterzo -v- London Borough of Lewisham; EAT 2-Oct-2001

Court: EAT
Date: 02-Oct-2001
Judges: Recorder Cox QC
Links: Bailii,
References: [2001] UKEAT 1223_99_0210,
Cases Cited:

Comments Off

Filed under Employment

BayWa -v- Hauptzollamt Weiden; ECJ 7-Mar-1991

ECJ For the purposes of determining the customs value of harvest seed produced from basic seed supplied by the buyer, there should be added to the price paid or payable, in accordance with Article 8(1)(b)(i) of Council Regulation No 1224/80, licence fees which the buyer has to pay to the breeder of the basic seed in respect of the propagation of that seed, even where the breeder’s service has been performed within the customs territory of the Community.
In the first place, such licence fees must be attributed to the purchase of the basic seed, and form part of the price payable for that seed, which is then incorporated in the imported goods; in the second place there is no general principle which excludes from customs valuation services provided and goods produced within the customs territory of the Community.

Court: ECJ
Date: 07-Mar-1991
Links: Bailii,
References: C-116/89, [1991] EUECJ C-116/89

Comments Off

Filed under Customs and Excise, European

Grifoni -v- EAEC; ECJ 5-Mar-1991

1. Oral orders cannot constitute a valid legal basis for the payment of work not included in the written contract concluded between an institution of the Communities and a supplier since such orders are precluded, first, by Article 50(1) of the Financial Regulation and the General Terms and Conditions applicable to the contract in question, which expressly state that all changes to the contract must be made by an additional act subject to the same conditions as the contract and that oral agreements are not binding on the parties, and secondly by the contract itself.
2. The application instituting the proceedings must contain a summary of the pleas in law on which the application is based and specify the nature of those pleas. An abstract statement of the pleas in law does not satisfy the requirements of the Statute or the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice.
3. When the Court derives its competence from an arbitration clause contained in a public or private contract it cannot consider a plea in law, such as undue enrichment, with a non-contractual basis.

Court: ECJ
Date: 05-Mar-1991
Links: Bailii,
References: C-330/88, [1991] EUECJ C-330/88

Comments Off

Filed under European

Giagounidis -v- Reutlingen; ECJ 5-Mar-1991

Since an identity card serves only to prove the identity and nationality of its holder, Article 4(1) of Directive 68/360 must be interpreted as meaning that a Member State is required to recognize the right of residence within its territory of the workers referred to in Article 1 of that directive when they produce a valid identity card, even if that card does not authorize its holder to leave the territory of the Member State in which it was issued.
The fact that the identity card was issued before the accession to the Communities of the Member State which issued it, that it does not mention that its validity is limited to the national territory and, finally, that its holder was admitted to the host Member State upon production of his passport alone does not alter the situation.

Court: ECJ
Date: 05-Mar-1991
Links: Bailii,
References: C-376/89, [1991] EUECJ C-376/89

Comments Off

Filed under European

Hosking -v- Michaelides and Another; ChD 28-Nov-2003

Permission to appeal is required against a summary assessment of costs. The correct approach was set out in Lownds. Here, and although the registrar had not followed the recommended two stage approach, the result was reasonable.

Court: ChD
Date: 28-Nov-2003
References: Times, 17-Dec-2003, Gazette, 22-Jan-2004
Cases Cited:

Comments Off

Filed under Costs