The section in the 1967Act required as a precondition to a request for a breath specimen that an accident had occurred. The defendant complained that this was an issue of fact, but had been decided by the deputy chairman and not the jury. Held: The appeal succeeded. Lord Widgery CJ said: ‘The issue whether there … Continue reading Regina v Seward: 1970
The defendant faced with an allegation of failng to provide a specimen of breath, argued that the consumption of alcohol since he had been driving could amount to a reasonable excuse. Held: The court considered what would amount to a reasonable excuse for a driver failing to provide a specimen of breath: ‘A state of … Continue reading Regina v Lennard: CACD 1973
The motorist was driving at an excessive and dangerous speed. He was seen by detectives from a police motor car. They followed him but thought that he was driving far too fast and dangerously for them to overtake him. They followed him to a holiday camp, and when he stopped there they kept him in … Continue reading Edkins v Knowles: QBD 1973
The employer was prosecuted under the 1961 Act. Held: the burden of proving that it was not reasonably practicable to make and keep a place of work safe rested upon the defendant employer. If an exception was to be established, it was for the party claiming the exception to establish it. (Majority) Where a linguistic … Continue reading Nimmo v Alexander Cowan and Sons Ltd: HL 1967
Whether the particular facts of a case amount to an accident is a question of law. In a case of disputed facts under s2(2) of the 1967 Act it is for the jury to decide the facts and apply to the facts found the judge’s direction as to the meaning of accident.Lord Widgery CJ:’We would … Continue reading Regina v Morris: 1972
The court was asked whether a blood specimen having been requested at one police station, it could be taken at another. Held: The requirement to provide a specimen for a laboratory test is something different from the actual providing of the specimen. Subsection (1) of section 3 deals with the former only, and not with … Continue reading Milne v M’Donald: HCJ 1971
Two ships had collided. A third itself ran aground trying to avoid them, and its ownes sought damages. Held: The unit approach to apportionment of damages was wrong.Lord Morris said of section 1 of the 1911 Act: ‘The section calls for inquiry as to fault, and inquiry as to damage or loss, and inquiry as … Continue reading The Miraflores and The Abadesa: PC 1967
The initial formalities of a request for a specimen of blood from a driver took place at one police station, but no doctor was available there and the suspect was taken to another police station where a specimen was given. He challenged his conviction on the ground that evidence of the specimen analysis was inadmissible … Continue reading Butler v Easton: QBD 1970
The appellants said that the 2004 Act infringed their rights under articles 8 11 and 14 and Art 1 of protocol 1. Held: Article 8 protected the right to private and family life. Its purpose was to protect individuals from unjustified intrusion by state agents into the private sphere within which they expected to be … Continue reading Countryside Alliance and others, Regina (on the Application of) v Attorney General and Another: HL 28 Nov 2007
The victim died on a farm when his dumper truck overturned burying him in its load. Held: The prosecutor needed to establish a prima facie case that the results required by the Act had not been achieved. He need only establish that a risk of injury arose out of the state of affairs at the … Continue reading Chargot Limited (T/A Contract Services) and Others, Regina v: HL 10 Dec 2008
The defendant had broadcast a TV programme using material confidential to the plaintiff, who now sought disclosure of the identity of the presumed thief.
Held: (Lord Salmon dissenting) The courts have never recognised a public interest right . .
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
The 1967 Act introduced the offence of driving with excess alcohol. The power to require a suspect to provide a laboratory blood or urine sample, by which blood alcohol could be tested, was made dependent upon a complex step-by-step procedure. The first step in that procedure was the taking of a preliminary (usually roadside) ‘breath … Continue reading Scott v Baker: 1968
The court considered a dispute about ownership and confidence in and copyright of of video tapes taken by Princess Diana before her death. Held: The courts have an inherent discretion to refuse to enforce of copyright. When assessing whether the copyright should be enforced the relevant issues would be ones arising from the work itself, … Continue reading Hyde Park Residence Ltd v Yelland, News Group Newspapers Ltd, News International Ltd, Murrell: CA 10 Feb 2000
The claimant, a fireman, sought damages for injuries suffered when he was injured answering a call out. He fell into a depressed area by the road side as he was pulling away a burning wooden pallet. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The court overturned a finding of dangerousness. Laws LJ stressed that the statutory highway … Continue reading Jones v Rhondda Cynon Taff County Borough Council: CA 15 Jul 2008
The pursuer and his passengers were injured when he drove off a bridge which had been damaged in a severe rainstorm. He claimed in negligence against the police, who had been informed of the collapse of the bridge, but had not erected any warning signs. As a result, a car fell into the river, killing … Continue reading Gibson v Orr, the Chief Constable, Strathlclyde Police: SCS 26 Feb 1999
Mr Holmes was killed when the defendant’s aircraft in which he was a passenger crashed on a domestic flight in Bangladesh. As a domestic flight, it was not international carriage. The proper law of the contract was undoubtedly Bangladeshi law. Under Bangladeshi law the plaintiff’s damages would have been limited to andpound;913. But Mr Holmes’s … Continue reading Holmes v Bangladesh Biman Corporation: HL 1989
What makes a road a Road? The Court was asked whether a Road was a ‘road’ for the purposes of the 1984 Act’ Held: It has often been said that the public access mentioned in the definition of ‘road’ must be both actual access and legal or lawful access. However, simple reference to a requirement … Continue reading Bowen and Others v Isle of Wight Council: ChD 3 Dec 2021
The landowner practised from property in Harrow. The former garden had now for many years been used as a forecourt open to the highway, for parking cars of staff and clients. Cars crossed the footpath to gain access, and backing out into the road when leaving. That use was recognised as lawful under planning law. … Continue reading Cusack v London Borough of Harrow: SC 19 Jun 2013
The claimant was driving along a road. He skidded on ice, crashed and was severely injured. He claimed damages saying that the Highway authority had failed to ‘maintain’ the road. Held: The statutory duty on a highway authority to keep a road in repair did not include an absolute duty to remove all ice. The … Continue reading Goodes v East Sussex County Council: HL 16 Jun 2000
The claimant appealed against rejection of his claim for personal injury which had been rejected on basis that it was out of time. He had contracted cancer in 2002, but had recovered. He later came to attribute this to exposure to asbestos at work in the docks up to 1967. He made his claim in … Continue reading Collins v Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills and Others: CA 23 May 2014
No damages for Psychiatric Harm Alone The House considered claims by police officers who had suffered psychiatric injury after tending the victims of the Hillsborough tragedy. Held: The general rules restricting the recovery of damages for pure psychiatric harm applied to the plaintiffs’ claims as employees. An employer has a duty to protect his employees … Continue reading White, Frost and others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and others: HL 3 Dec 1998
The claimants asserted negligence in the defendant in failing to provide an adequate response to an emergency call, leading, they said to the death of their daughter at the hands of her violent partner. They claimed also under the 1998 Act. The . .
This is a continuation of the list of significant recent cases on our front page. As a most recent case pushes its way to the top, the last on teh front page falls into here. Newest significant cases.
