The applicants sought judicial review of the defendant’s response to a report of the Parliamentary Ombudsman finding maladministration by the defendant in rejecting the recommendation for compensation. Held: The respondent’s rejection of the recommendations in some cases lacked cogency and fell short of the requirement.Carnwath LJ said: ”Discussion: In considering the application of Bradley to … Continue reading Equitable Members Action Group, Regina (On the Application of) v Her Majesty’s Treasury: Admn 15 Oct 2009
The first defendant had acquired several properties, and was due to make repayments greatly in excess of his income. A further defendant, his brother, was a solicitor who was known to have been involved in mortgage fraud and was suspected of having additionally defrauded the first defendant. The first defendant said he was not to … Continue reading St Paul Travelers Insurance Co Ltd v Okporuah and others: ChD 10 Aug 2006
Administrative Discretion to be Used Reasonably The applicant challenged the manner of decision making as to the conditions which had been attached to its licence to open the cinema on Sundays. It had not been allowed to admit children under 15 years of age. The statute provided no appeal procedure, and the applicant sought a … Continue reading Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation: CA 10 Nov 1947
The applicant had applied to the respondent for funding for new buildings. The application was approved, but the application was rejected when the respondent ran out of funds. The claimant said that a legitimate expectation had been created, and that it should be re-imbursed its expenses. Held: The application failed. The meat of the alleged … Continue reading Grimsby Institute of Further and Higher Education, Regina (on The Application of) v Learning and Skills Council: Admn 12 Aug 2010
Shareholder May Sue for Additional Personal Losses A company brought a claim of negligence against its solicitors, and, after that claim was settled, the company’s owner brought a separate claim in respect of the same subject-matter. Held: It need not be an abuse of the court for a shareholder to seek damages against advisers to … Continue reading Johnson v Gore Wood and Co: HL 14 Dec 2000
The prisoner, sentenced to life imprisonment with a whole life tariff for the murders of children, now appealed against the imposition of the whole life tarriff. Held: The appeal failed. It was possible for a Home Secretary to set a whole life tariff for a person subject to a compulsory sentence of life imprisonment, provided … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Hindley: HL 30 Mar 2000
A hotel had been requisitioned during the war for defence purposes. The owner claimed compensation. The AG argued that the liability to pay compensation had been displaced by statute giving the Crown the necessary powers. Held: There is an established general principle, of high constitutional importance, that there is no common law power to take … Continue reading Attorney General v De Keyser’s Royal Hotel Ltd: HL 10 May 1920
The deceased soldier died of heat exhaustion whilst on active service in Iraq. It was said that he was owed a duty under human rights laws, and that any coroner’s inquest should be a fuller one to satisfy the state’s duty under Article 2. Held: The SSD’s appeal succeeded. ‘jurisdiction’ within the meaning of Article … Continue reading Smith, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence and Oxfordshire Assistant Deputy Coroner (Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening): SC 30 Jun 2010
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
Judges: Lord Justice Underhill (Vice-President of the Court of Appeal, Civil Division) Lord Justice Mccombe And Lord Justice Green Citations: [2020] EWCA Civ 723, [2020] 1 WLR 3300, [2020] 1 WLR 3300, [2020] HRLR 14, [2020] WLR(D) 323 Links: Bailii, WLRD Statutes: Representation of the People Act 2000 10 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: … Continue reading Coughlan, Regina (on The Application of) v The Minister for The Cabinet Office and Another: CA 5 Jun 2020
In August 2018 the Cabinet Office invited local authorities to take part in voter ID pilot schemes. Under these schemes, voters would not be allowed to vote in polling booths unless they had a form of ID on them, such as a driver’s licence. On 3 November 2018 the Cabinet Office announced that a number … Continue reading Coughlan, Regina (on The Application of) v Minister for The Cabinet Office: SC 27 Apr 2022
Voter Identification Pilot Scheme within Act The Minister had brought in a pilot testing scheme for local elections. It would require intending voters to provide evidence of identity. The claimant said that the scheme did not fall within the range of what was allowed under the 2003 Act. Held: The claim failed. The phrase ‘how … Continue reading Coughlan, Regina (on The Application of) v The Minister for The Cabinet Office: Admn 20 Mar 2019
The applicant sought leave to bring judicial review of the prime minister’s decsion not to hold a referendum on the ratification of the treaty of Lisbon. Held: The claimant had arguable points under the 2000 Act and otherwise, and permission was granted for the review to be heard. Judges: Owen J Citations: [2008] EWHC 936 … Continue reading Wheeler, Regina (on the Application of) v Office of the Prime Minister and Another: Admn 2 May 2008
Evidence from 3rd Party Torture Inadmissible The applicants had been detained following the issue of certificates issued by the respondent that they posed a terrorist threat. They challenged the decisions of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission saying that evidence underlying the decisions had probably been obtained by torture committed by foreign powers, and should not … Continue reading A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2): HL 8 Dec 2005
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as unlawful the respondent’s, at first unpublished, policy introduced in 2006, that by default, those awaiting deportation should be … Continue reading Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 23 Mar 2011
The prisoner claimed that his right to vote had not been re-instated despite a year having passed since the European Court of Human Rights had found that the withdrawal of that right for prisoners was an infringement. Held: It was not possible to read down the provision of the 1983 Act, and a declaration of … Continue reading Smith v KD Scott, Electoral Registration Officer: SCS 24 Jan 2007
The court examined the development of the law in relation to comparative advertising. Jacob J said: ‘Prior to the coming into force of the Trade Marks Act 1994 comparative advertising using a registered trade mark of a competitor was, subject to minor exceptions involving the use of a company name, forbidden by section 4(1) of … Continue reading Vodafone Group Plc v Orange Personal Communications Services Ltd: ChD 1997
The ratification by the government of a Treaty may create a legitimate expectation that its terms will be applied in dealing with an individual affected by it. (Woolf) ‘I will accept that the entering into a treaty by the Secretary of State could give rise to a legitimate expectation on which the public in general … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Mohammed Hussain Ahmed and Idris Ibrahim Patel: Admn 27 Apr 1998
The appellant, of Nigerian origin had been brought here at the age of 14 with false identity papers, and was put to work caring for the respondent’s children. In 2008 she was dismissed and ejected from the house. She brought proceedings alleging racial discrimination, but the only element of her claim which succeeded was of … Continue reading Hounga v Allen and Another: SC 30 Jul 2014
(Belize) A company had been formed to manage telecommunications in Belize. The parties disputed the interpretation of its articles. Shares had been sold, but the company was structured so as to leave a degree of control with the government. It was argued that a term was to be implied requiring resignation of a director when … Continue reading Attorney General of Belize and others v Belize Telecom Ltd and Another: PC 18 Mar 2009
Presumption of Damage in Defamation is rebuttable The defendant complained that the presumption in English law that the victim of a libel had suffered damage was incompatible with his right to a fair trial. They said the statements complained of were repetitions of statements made by US authorities. The claimant had asserted that no more … Continue reading Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel: CA 3 Feb 2005
Abuse of Process and Re-litigation The court set down the principles to be applied in abuse of process cases, where a matter was raised again which should have been dealt with in earlier proceedings. Sir James Wigram VC said: ‘In trying this question I believe I state the rule of the Court correctly when I … Continue reading Henderson v Henderson: 20 Jul 1843
Balancing Rights of Prisoner and Society The appellant had been convicted of the murder of three police officers in 1966. His tariff of thirty years had now long expired. He complained that material put before the Parole Board reviewing has case had not been disclosed to him. Held: The appeal failed (by a majority). The … Continue reading Roberts v Parole Board: HL 7 Jul 2005
The claimants challenged the 2004 Order which prevented their return to their homes on the Chagos Islands. The islanders had been taken off the island to leave it for use as a US airbase. In 2004, the island was no longer needed, and payment had been made (ineffectively) to assist the dispossessed islanders, but an … Continue reading Bancoult, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2): HL 22 Oct 2008
The applicants had had their requests for asylum refused. They complained that if they were removed from the UK, their article 3 rights would be infringed. If they were returned to Pakistan or Vietnam they would be persecuted for their religious faiths. Held: A distinction was to be made between domestic cases involving actions within … Continue reading Regina v Special Adjudicator ex parte Ullah; Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 17 Jun 2004
Wives had charged the family homes to secure their husband’s business borrowings, and now resisted possession orders, claiming undue influence. Held: Undue influence is an equitable protection created to undo the effect of excess influence of one person over the will of another, though it should not always be presumed to arise from the existence … Continue reading Royal Bank of Scotland v Etridge (No 2); Barclays Bank plc v Harris; Midland Bank plc v Wallace, etc: HL 11 Oct 2001
Rebalancing of Enhanced Disclosure Requirements The Court was asked as to the practice of supplying enhanced criminal record certificates under the 1997 Act. It was said that the release of reports of suspicions was a disproportionate interference in the claimants article 8 rights to a private life. The enhanced record revealed that the claimant’s son … Continue reading L, Regina (On the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: SC 29 Oct 2009
Movement retsriction was not Liberty Deprivation The claimants had been present during a demonstration policed by the respondent. They appealed against dismissal of their claims for false imprisonment having been prevented from leaving Oxford Circus for over seven hours. The claimants appealed against rejection of their claims on human rights law. Held: The appeal failed. … Continue reading Austin and Another v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: HL 28 Jan 2009
The applicants had been made subject of anti-social behaviour orders. They challenged the basis upon which the orders had been made. Held: The orders had no identifiable consequences which would make the process a criminal one. Civil standards of evidence therefore applied, and hearsay evidence was admissible. Nevertheless, the test as to whether it was … Continue reading Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others: HL 17 Oct 2002
(Grand Chamber) The applicant said that whilst a prisoner he had been banned from voting. The UK operated with minimal exceptions, a blanket ban on prisoners voting. Held: Voting is a right not a privilege. It was a right central in a democratic society. Though the right is not absolute, any limitation had to be … Continue reading Hirst v United Kingdom (2): ECHR 6 Oct 2005
Account taken of circumstances wihout ambiguity The respondent gave advice on home income plans. The individual claimants had assigned their initial claims to the scheme, but later sought also to have their mortgages in favour of the respondent set aside. Held: Investors having once assigned their causes of action to the ICS, could not later … Continue reading Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society: HL 19 Jun 1997
Extension oh Human Rights Beyond Borders The appellants complained that the system set up by the respondent where Home Office officers were placed in Prague airport to pre-vet applicants for asylum from Romania were dsicriminatory in that substantially more gypsies were refused entry than others, and that it was contrary to the obligations of the … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and another, ex parte European Roma Rights Centre and others: HL 9 Dec 2004
The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they did. A British subject, who was suspected in the exact same way, and there were … Continue reading A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004
Prorogation request was non-justiciable The claimant sought to challenge the prorogation of Parliament by the Queen at the request of the respondent. Held: The claim failed: ‘the decision of the Prime Minister to advise Her Majesty the Queen to prorogue Parliament is not justiciable in Her Majesty’s courts.’‘The Prime Minister’s decision that Parliament should be … Continue reading Miller, Regina (On the Application Of) v The Prime Minister: QBD 11 Sep 2019
The claimants had been provisionally listed as ‘people considered unsuitable to work with vulnerable adults’ which meant that they could no longer work, but they said they were given no effective and speedy opportunity to object to the listing. Typically the process took many months. Held: The procedure asked only if the employer reasonably considered … Continue reading Wright and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Another: HL 21 Jan 2009
A mandatory lifer is to be permitted to suggest the period of actual sentence to be served. The Home Secretary must give reasons for refusing a lifer’s release. What fairness requires in any particular case is ‘essentially an intuitive judgment’, changes over time, and the requirements are flexible and closely conditioned by the legal and … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Doody and Others: HL 25 Jun 1993
The Chagos Islands had been a British dependent territory since 1814. The British government repatriated the islanders in the 1960s, and the Ilois now sought damages for their wrongful displacement, misfeasance, deceit, negligence and to establish a . .
A trial had not yet been begun, but the court was now asked a point of pure statutory construction relating to the manner in which election expenses are required to be calculated and declared. The defendants face charges of knowingly making false . .
The various applicants sought judicial review of the operation of the Protection of Vulnerable Adults List insofar as they had been placed provisionally on the list, preventing them from finding work. One complaint was that the list had operated . .
