Click the case name for better results:

Care First Partnership Ltd v Roffey and Others: CA 22 Nov 2000

An employment tribunal had no power to dismiss a claim as without a reasonable prospect of success before it was begun to be heard. The power to regulate its own hearings did not include such a power, and the power to dismiss a claim as frivolous or vexatious, or for failure to comply with directions … Continue reading Care First Partnership Ltd v Roffey and Others: CA 22 Nov 2000

Kimberley-Clark Worldwide Inc v Procter and Gamble Ltd and Another: ChD 6 Sep 2000

A patent claim should not be considered covetous without evidence that the claim was in some way blameworthy. Courts must be careful when judging claims with hindsight, and where different national standards had been involved. A claim to amend a patent drafted in the US for grant in the European Patent Office by a German … Continue reading Kimberley-Clark Worldwide Inc v Procter and Gamble Ltd and Another: ChD 6 Sep 2000

Douglas, Zeta Jones, Northern and Shell Plc v Hello! Limited (No 1): CA 21 Dec 2000

The first two claimants sold exclusive rights to photograph their wedding to the third claimant. A paparrazzi infiltrated the wedding and then sold his unauthorised photographs to the defendants, who now appealed injunctions restraining them from publishing them. Held: Interlocutory injunctions restraining publication of the unauthorised photographs were lifted. A right of privacy could be … Continue reading Douglas, Zeta Jones, Northern and Shell Plc v Hello! Limited (No 1): CA 21 Dec 2000

Acts

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

Wright and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Another: HL 21 Jan 2009

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

Barrett v Ministry of Defence: CA 3 Jan 1995

The deceased was an off-duty naval airman. The claim was based upon the alleged negligent failure of the defendant to enforce disciplinary regulations against drunkenness so as to protect the deceased against his own known proclivity for alcohol abuse. Held: The Ministry of Defence has no duty to prevent a forces member from the abuse … Continue reading Barrett v Ministry of Defence: CA 3 Jan 1995

Drummond v Regina: CACD 7 Mar 2002

The appellant had been convicted of causing death by careless driving with excess alcohol. He said that he had taken alcohol after stopping driving but before being tested. He challenged the weight of the burden of proof ascribed by the statute. The judge had directed the jury that he faced a persuasive burden of establishing … Continue reading Drummond v Regina: CACD 7 Mar 2002

Wright and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Another: CA 24 Oct 2007

Where it was proposed to provisionally list care workers as been prevented from undertaking work with vulnerable adults or children, that worker should be given opportunity to make representations first. Provisional listing did engage article 6, but that a breach could be avoided by giving the care worker a right to make representations before being … Continue reading Wright and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Another: CA 24 Oct 2007

Johnson and others v London Borough of Havering and others: CA 30 Jan 2007

The claimants were residents of old people’s homes run by the council and maintained under s21 of the 1948 Act. They objected to the transfer of the homes into the private sector saying that it would infringe their rights to family life, and that the protection afforded to them would be reduced. Held: The claimants … Continue reading Johnson and others v London Borough of Havering and others: CA 30 Jan 2007

The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Goldberg, Mcavoy: ChD 26 Nov 2003

The Secretary of State sought a disqualification order. The director argued that one shoul not be made in the absence of some breach of legal duty, some dishonesty should be shown. Held: The answer was a mixture of fact and law. A breach of duty alone was neither necessary nor sufficient. Unfitness by reason of … Continue reading The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Goldberg, Mcavoy: ChD 26 Nov 2003

Rantzen v Mirror Group Newspapers (1986) Ltd and Others: CA 1 Apr 1993

Four articles in the People all covered the same story about Esther Rantzen’s organisation, Childline, suggesting that the plaintiff had protected a teacher who had revealed to Childline abuses of children occurring at a school where he taught, by keeping secret that he himself was a pervert, unfit to have any child in his care. … Continue reading Rantzen v Mirror Group Newspapers (1986) Ltd and Others: CA 1 Apr 1993

Lord Browne of Madingley v Associated Newspapers Ltd: CA 3 Apr 2007

The appellant sought to restrict publication by the defendants in the Mail on Sunday of matters which he said were a breach of confidence. He had lied to a court in giving evidence, whilst at the same time being ready to trash the reputation of his opponent. The judge had refused to excise the details … Continue reading Lord Browne of Madingley v Associated Newspapers Ltd: CA 3 Apr 2007

Downtex v Flatley: CA 2 Oct 2003

The claimants sought damages for defamation and breach of contract. The claimants had purchased a business from the defendant, which contract included a clause requiring the defendant to say nothing damaging about the business. The defendant asserted qualified privilege. The defendant was alleged to have told suppliers, by means of anonymous letters, that they were … Continue reading Downtex v Flatley: CA 2 Oct 2003

Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman and others: HL 8 Feb 1990

Limitation of Loss from Negligent Mis-statement The plaintiffs sought damages from accountants for negligence. They had acquired shares in a target company and, relying upon the published and audited accounts which overstated the company’s earnings, they purchased further shares. Held: The duties of an auditor are founded in contract and the extent of the duties … Continue reading Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman and others: HL 8 Feb 1990

Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza: HL 21 Jun 2004

Same Sex Partner Entitled to tenancy Succession The protected tenant had died. His same-sex partner sought a statutory inheritance of the tenancy. Held: His appeal succeeded. The Fitzpatrick case referred to the position before the 1998 Act: ‘Discriminatory law undermines the rule of law because it is the antithesis of fairness. It brings the law … Continue reading Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza: HL 21 Jun 2004

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

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

Tower Hamlets v M and Others: FD 27 Mar 2015

The authority sought orders to prevent the respondent children travelling to countries controlled by the ISIS groups. The parents being unlikely to be effective to restrain them, the court had made them wards of court. Held: ‘the status of a Ward of the High Court of England and Wales has achieved international recognition. For this … Continue reading Tower Hamlets v M and Others: FD 27 Mar 2015

Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others: HL 24 Feb 2005

The appellants were teachers in Christian schools who said that the blanket ban on corporal punishment interfered with their religious freedom. They saw moderate physical discipline as an essential part of educating children in a Christian manner. Held: The appeal was dismissed. For Article 9 to be engaged (aside from certain other threshold conditions) the … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others: HL 24 Feb 2005

Ladd v Marshall: CA 29 Nov 1954

Conditions for new evidence on appeal At the trial, the wife of the appellant’s opponent said she had forgotten certain events. After the trial she began divorce proceedings, and informed the appellant that she now remembered. He sought either to appeal admitting fresh evidence, or for a retrial. Held: The Court of Appeal refused to … Continue reading Ladd v Marshall: CA 29 Nov 1954

The British Medical Association, Regina (on the Application of) v The General Medical Council and Another: Admn 4 May 2016

The BMA sought to challenge the validity of the rules governing the procedure of Fitness to Practice panels. In particular the BMA challenged the new absence of a requirement that the panel’s legal advice and assistance be available to the parties. Held: The claim failed: ‘I am wholly unconvinced that a legally qualified chair has … Continue reading The British Medical Association, Regina (on the Application of) v The General Medical Council and Another: Admn 4 May 2016

Somerville v Scottish Ministers: HL 24 Oct 2007

The claimants complained of their segregation while in prison. Several preliminary questions were to be decided: whether damages might be payable for breach of a Convention Right; wheher the act of a prison governor was the act of the executive; whether time ran from the date of the first breach, whether want of proportionality is … Continue reading Somerville v Scottish Ministers: HL 24 Oct 2007

In re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof): HL 14 Dec 1995

Evidence allowed – Care Application after Abuse Children had made allegations of serious sexual abuse against their step-father. He was acquitted at trial, but the local authority went ahead with care proceedings. The parents appealed against a finding that a likely risk to the children had still been been found. Held: A care order could … Continue reading In re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof): HL 14 Dec 1995