Where a number of persons are entrusted with powers not of mere private confidence, but in some respect of a general nature, and all of them are regularly assembled, the majority will conclude the minority, and their act will be the act of the whole.
Judges:
Eyre CJ
Citations:
(1798) 1 Bos and Pul 875, [1798] EngR 112, (1798) 1 Bos and Pul 229, (1798) 126 ER 875 (B)
Links:
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Central and North-West London Mental Health NHS Trust QBD 9-Dec-2002
The patient sought his discharge. A panel of three sat, but only two members voted for his release.
Held: The Act allowed a panel with a minimum quorum of three, but also required a minimum of three to vote in favour. The mere majority was . .
Cited – Regina on the Application of Tagoe-Thompson v the Hospital Managers of the Park Royal Centre CA 12-Mar-2003
The applicant, detained under the section by the respondent, appealed refusal of a judicial review and a writ of habeas corpus. He had applied for a review of his detention. The review had been heard by a panel of three. Two judged in his favour. . .
Cited – Picea Holdings Ltd v London Rent Assessment Panel QBD 1971
The court asked whether a rent assessment committee constituted under the Rent Act 1968 could act by a majority in determining a fair rent. Was the well established rule of law in Grindley controlled either by something expressed in this statute or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Administrative, Trusts
Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.179767