Click the case name for better results:

Home Office v Hariette Harman: HL 11 Feb 1982

The defendant had permitted a journalist to see documents revealed to her as in her capacity as a solicitor in the course of proceedings. Held: The documents were disclosed under an obligation to use them for the instant case only. That rule was imposed because ‘Discovery constitutes a very serious invasion of the privacy and … Continue reading Home Office v Hariette Harman: HL 11 Feb 1982

Andrew v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis: ChD 18 Mar 2011

The claimant sought unredacted disclosure of documents by the second defendant so that he could pursue an action against the first, who, he said, were thought to have intercepted his mobile phone messages, and where the second defendant had documents which he said would support his claim. The second defendant sought to argue public interest … Continue reading Andrew v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis: ChD 18 Mar 2011

Al Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others: SC 13 Jul 2011

The claimant pursued a civil claim for damages, alleging complicity of the respondent in his torture whilst in the custody of foreign powers. The respondent sought that certain materials be available to the court alone and not to the claimant or the public under a closed material procedure. It argued that whilst the need for … Continue reading Al Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others: SC 13 Jul 2011

Conway v Rimmer: HL 28 Feb 1968

Crown Privilege for Documents held by the Polie The plaintiff probationary police constable had been investigated, prosecuted and cleared of an allegation of theft. He now claimed damages for malicious prosecution, and in the course of the action, sought disclosure of five documents, but these were withheld on the ground of Crown privilege. The House … Continue reading Conway v Rimmer: HL 28 Feb 1968

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

Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police: HL 19 Nov 1981

No collateral attack on Jury findigs. An attempt was made to open up in a civil action, allegations of assaults by the police prior to the making of confessions which had been disposed of in a voir dire in the course of a criminal trial. The plaintiffs had imprisoned having spent many years after conviction … Continue reading Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police: HL 19 Nov 1981

McCauley v Vine: 1999

Sir Patrick Russell considered the effect of section 11 of the 1968 Act, saying: ‘The closing words of that section ‘unless the contrary is proved’ provides in my judgment, the clearest possible mandate to a defendant in a road traffic accident case . .

BAS Capital Funding Corporation, Deutsche Bank Ag London, Paine Webber Capital Inc, PW Exe Lp, Pw Partners 1999 Lp v Medfinco Limited, Abacus Holdings Limited, Andreas W Gerdes, HTC Inc, etc: ChD 25 Jul 2003

The claimants wanted to bring actions in respect of various matters under shareholders agreements in complex international joint ventures. Leave was given to serve English proceedings in Malta, and the claim form and particulars of claim were faxed and emailed and delivered by hand at the registered offices of the company and at the private … Continue reading BAS Capital Funding Corporation, Deutsche Bank Ag London, Paine Webber Capital Inc, PW Exe Lp, Pw Partners 1999 Lp v Medfinco Limited, Abacus Holdings Limited, Andreas W Gerdes, HTC Inc, etc: ChD 25 Jul 2003

Wilkinson v Kitzinger and others: FD 31 Jul 2006

The parties had gone through a ceremony of marriage in Columbia, being both women. After the relationship failed, the claimant sought a declaration that the witholding of the recognition of same-sex marriages recoginised in a foreign jurisdiction was an infringement of her human rights. Held: Such a relationship is recognised in England as a civil … Continue reading Wilkinson v Kitzinger and others: FD 31 Jul 2006

S v Suren and Another: QBD 10 Sep 2004

Tugendhat J [2004] EWHC 1981 (QB) Bailii Defamation Act 1952, Civil Evidence Act 1968 5 England and Wales Citing: Cited – McManus and others v Beckham CA 4-Jul-2002 The claimant sought damages from the defendant who was a pop star, and had vociferously, publicly, and wrongly accused the claimant of selling pictures with fake autographs … Continue reading S v Suren and Another: QBD 10 Sep 2004

The Coca-Cola Company and Another v Cengiz Aytacli and others: ChD 30 Jan 2003

The claimant having succeeded in an action against the defendants, now sought an order for their committal for contempt, accusing them of having given false evidence, and of having failed to comply with court orders made. The defendant asserted a right not to incriminate himself, and gave no evidence. He now claimed to have been … Continue reading The Coca-Cola Company and Another v Cengiz Aytacli and others: ChD 30 Jan 2003

Regina v Connor and another; Regina v Mirza: HL 22 Jan 2004

Extension of Inquiries into Jury Room Activities The defendants sought an enquiry as to events in the jury rooms on their trials. They said that the secrecy of a jury’s deliberations did not fit the human right to a fair trial. In one case, it was said that jurors believed that the defendant’s use of … Continue reading Regina v Connor and another; Regina v Mirza: HL 22 Jan 2004

Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: HL 14 Oct 2004

Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant? Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: ‘The overriding concern is that a trial should be fair, and the presumption … Continue reading Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: HL 14 Oct 2004

Arrow Nominees Inc and Another v Blackledge and Others: CA 22 Jun 2000

A petition had been lodged alleging unfair prejudice in the conduct of the company’s affairs. The defendants alleged that when applying for relief under section 459, the claimants had attempted to pervert the course of justice by producing forged or falsified documentation in discovery. The forgery was admitted. Held: If a party to litigation behaved … Continue reading Arrow Nominees Inc and Another v Blackledge and Others: CA 22 Jun 2000

Vizcaya Partners Ltd v Picard and Another: PC 3 Feb 2016

No Contractual Obligation to Try Case in New York (Gibraltar) The appellant had invested in a fraudulent Ponzi scheme run by Bernard Madoff. They were repaid sums before the fund collapsed, and the trustees now sought repayment by way of enforcement of an order obtained in New York. Held: The appeal was allowed. There was … Continue reading Vizcaya Partners Ltd v Picard and Another: PC 3 Feb 2016

Regina v Kansal (2): HL 29 Nov 2001

The prosecutor had lead and relied at trial on evidence obtained by compulsory questioning under the 1986 Act. Held: In doing so the prosecutor was acting to give effect to section 433. The decision in Lambert to disallow retrospective effect of Human Rights decisions in appeal cases may have been incorrect, but will be followed. … Continue reading Regina v Kansal (2): HL 29 Nov 2001

Douglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others; similar: HL 2 May 2007

In Douglas, the claimants said that the defendants had interfered with their contract to provide exclusive photographs of their wedding to a competing magazine, by arranging for a third party to infiltrate and take and sell unauthorised photographs. In OBG, the defendants acted as receivers under an invalid charge, and were accused of unlawful interference … Continue reading Douglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others; similar: HL 2 May 2007

Welsh v Stokes and Another: CA 27 Jul 2007

The claimant sued a riding stables after she was badly injured on being thrown from the horse provided. Her claim in negligence failed, but she succeeded under strict liabiilty under the 1971 Act, after the judge relied upon hearsay evidence. Held: The appeal failed on either account. The judge had directed himself properly in his … Continue reading Welsh v Stokes and Another: CA 27 Jul 2007

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

Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd (MGN) (No 1): HL 6 May 2004

The claimant appealed against the denial of her claim that the defendant had infringed her right to respect for her private life. She was a model who had proclaimed publicly that she did not take drugs, but the defendant had published a story showing a picture of her leaving a drug addiction clinic, along with … Continue reading Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd (MGN) (No 1): HL 6 May 2004

Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and others: HL 28 Oct 1999

Fair Coment on Political Activities The defendant newspaper had published articles wrongly accusing the claimant, the former Prime Minister of Ireland of duplicity. The paper now appealed, saying that it should have had available to it a defence of qualified privilege because of the claimant’s status as a politician. Held: The appeal failed (Lords Hope … Continue reading Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and others: HL 28 Oct 1999

Al Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others: QBD 18 Nov 2009

The claimants sought damages from the defendants saying that they had been held and ill treated at various detention centres by foreign authorities, but with the involvement of the defendants. The defendants sought to bring evidence before the court as closed material, not to be seen by the claimants. Held: The court could make such … Continue reading Al Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others: QBD 18 Nov 2009

Canada Trust Co and Others v Stolzenberg and Others (No 2): HL 12 Oct 2000

The plaintiffs alleged the involvement of the defendant in a conspiracy to defraud. He had been domiciled in England, but had moved to Germany. He denied that the UK court had jurisdiction. The court of appeal said that jurisdiction was determined at the issue of the writ. The defendant appealed. Held: Where one defendant was … Continue reading Canada Trust Co and Others v Stolzenberg and Others (No 2): HL 12 Oct 2000

G and C Kreglinger v The New Patagonian Meat and Cold Storage Company: HL 20 Nov 1913

Mortgagor’s collateral dvantage is not a clog The appellant woolbrokers had lent the respondent andpound;10,000 with a floating charge over its undertaking. The loan agreement provided that, for five years, the appellants would have first refusal over all sheepskins sold by the company. The company paid off the loan, but the appellants claimed that they … Continue reading G and C Kreglinger v The New Patagonian Meat and Cold Storage Company: HL 20 Nov 1913

Total Network Sl v Revenue and Customs: HL 12 Mar 2008

The House was asked whether an action for unlawful means conspiracy was available against a participant in a missing trader intra-community, or carousel, fraud. The company appealed a finding of liability saying that the VAT Act and Regulations contained the entire regime. Held: Criminal conduct at common law or by statute can constitute unlawful means … Continue reading Total Network Sl v Revenue and Customs: HL 12 Mar 2008

A, Regina (on The Application of) v B; Regina (A) v Director of Establishments of the Security Service: SC 9 Dec 2009

B, a former senior member of the security services wished to publish his memoirs. He was under contractual and statutory obligations of confidentiality. He sought judicial review of a decision not to allow him to publish parts of the book, saying it was vitiated by bias, and in breach of his right to freedom of … Continue reading A, Regina (on The Application of) v B; Regina (A) v Director of Establishments of the Security Service: SC 9 Dec 2009

Douglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others (No 3): CA 18 May 2005

The principal claimants sold the rights to take photographs of their wedding to a co-claimant magazine (OK). Persons acting on behalf of the defendants took unauthorised photographs which the defendants published. The claimants had retained joint copyright over the photographs and reserved a right to control publication of any particular photographs. In return they made … Continue reading Douglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others (No 3): CA 18 May 2005

Taylor and Others v Director of The Serious Fraud Office and Others: HL 29 Oct 1998

The defendant had requested the Isle of Man authorities to investigate the part if any taken by the plaintiff in a major fraud. No charges were brought against the plaintiff, but the documents showing suspicion came to be disclosed in the later trial of others. The plaintiff sought damages in defamation. Held: The documents which … Continue reading Taylor and Others v Director of The Serious Fraud Office and Others: HL 29 Oct 1998

Barclay and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Others: SC 22 Oct 2014

Constitutional Status of Chanel Islands considered The Court was asked as to the role, if any, of the courts of England and Wales (including the Supreme Court) in the legislative process of one of the Channel Islands. It raised fundamental questions about the constitutional relationship between the United Kingdom and the Bailiwicks of Guernsey and … Continue reading Barclay and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Others: SC 22 Oct 2014

A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 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

Al Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others: CA 4 May 2010

Each claimant had been captured and mistreated by the US government, and claimed the involvement in and responsibility for that mistreatment by the respondents. The court was asked whether a court in England and Wales, in the absence of statutory authority, could order a closed material procedure for part or all of the trial of … Continue reading Al Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others: CA 4 May 2010

Attorney-General v Leveller Magazine Ltd: HL 1 Feb 1979

The appellants were magazines and journalists who published, after committal proceedings, the name of a witness, a member of the security services, who had been referred to as Colonel B during the hearing. An order had been made for his name not to be disclosed during the hearing, but the court had had no power … Continue reading Attorney-General v Leveller Magazine Ltd: HL 1 Feb 1979

Hussain and Others v The London Borough of Waltham Forest: CA 19 Nov 2020

Facts of Spent Conviction Admissible at Common Law The claimants sought licenses to manage houses in multiple occupation, but were refused, the council relying on spent convictions. The claimants sought summarily to strike out those parts of the pleadings referring to the spent convictions. Held: For the reasons they gave, the tribunal panel were correct … Continue reading Hussain and Others v The London Borough of Waltham Forest: CA 19 Nov 2020

Duncan v Cammell, Laird and Company Limited (Discovery): HL 27 Apr 1942

Relatives of deceased seamen claimed damages against the defendants after their husbands were lost a sea in a submarine built by the defendants. The Ministry of Defence instructed the defendants not to disclose any details of the boat’s construction, on the ground that it would be contrary to the public interest to produce them. Held: … Continue reading Duncan v Cammell, Laird and Company Limited (Discovery): HL 27 Apr 1942

Earles v Barclays Bank plc; Merc 8 Oct 2009

References: [2009] EWHC 2500 (Mercantile), [2009] WLR (D) 309 Links: Times, Bailii, WLRD Coram: Judge Simon Brown, QC The claimant had lost his claim against the bank, but resisted the amount of costs claimed. Held: The trial had been of a simple factual dispute, and the bank had failed adequately to disclose electronically held material … Continue reading Earles v Barclays Bank plc; Merc 8 Oct 2009