Click the case name for better results:

Director of Public Prosecutions v Lennon: Admn 11 May 2006

The DPP appealed against dismissal of a charge under the 1990 Act. The defendant had been involved in a campaign of mail-bombing the complainant’s computer systems with over a half million mails, causing a denial of service. The question was whether it was the defendant or the complainant who determined whether an email would be … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Lennon: Admn 11 May 2006

Motor Oil Hellas (Corinth) Refineries SA v Shipping Corporation of India (The Kanchenjunga): HL 1990

A ship was caught in harbour when an air raid broke out. The master took the ship to sea where it suffered damage. Held: The shipowners were protected by a war risks clause in the charterparty agreement. As to waiver by election, Lord Goff of Chieveley said: ‘In the present case, we are concerned with … Continue reading Motor Oil Hellas (Corinth) Refineries SA v Shipping Corporation of India (The Kanchenjunga): HL 1990

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

Burwell v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 1 May 2009

The defendant appealed against the decision of the Magistrates to accept a prosecutor’s certificate as to compliance with time limits for commencing the prosecution. He argued that the police had all the evidence in their possession at an earlier point. Judges: Keene LJ, Roderick Evans J Citations: [2009] EWHC 1069 (Admin), (2009) 173 JP 351 … Continue reading Burwell v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 1 May 2009

Morgans v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 29 Dec 1998

The defendant argued that once the prosecutor had all the material on which the prosecution was eventually brought, then for the purposes of section 11(2) time began to run. Held: When considering the time limits for a prosecution under the Act, the officer investigating is the prosecutor, until the case is taken over by the … Continue reading Morgans v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 29 Dec 1998

Various Claimants v WM Morrisons Supermarket Plc: QBD 1 Dec 2017

The defendant employer had had confidential information of many of its staff taken and disclosed by a rogue employee. The employees now sought compensation. The main issue was whether the company was directly or vicariously liable for the tort. Held: The company were not directly liable, but were liable vicariously: ‘Adopting the broad and evaluative … Continue reading Various Claimants v WM Morrisons Supermarket Plc: QBD 1 Dec 2017

Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) (‘Spycatcher’): HL 13 Oct 1988

Loss of Confidentiality Protection – public domain A retired secret service employee sought to publish his memoirs from Australia. The British government sought to restrain publication there, and the defendants sought to report those proceedings, which would involve publication of the allegations made. The AG sought to restrain those publications. Held: A duty of confidence … Continue reading Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) (‘Spycatcher’): HL 13 Oct 1988

Holmes v Governor of Brixton Prison and Another: Admn 20 Aug 2004

The applicant sought his release from imprisonment where he awaited extradition to Germany. He was suspected of an offence of deception. He said there was insufficient evidence that the offence alleged would be an offence here. The alleged offence involved having misused the passwords of others, which was the deception of a machine. Held: Davies … Continue reading Holmes v Governor of Brixton Prison and Another: Admn 20 Aug 2004

Zezev and Yarimaka v Governor of HM Prison Brixton and another: CACD 2002

Wright J said: ‘But if an individual, by misusing or bypassing any relevant password, places in the files of the computer a bogus e-mail by pretending that the password holder is the author when he is not, then such an addition to such data is plainly unauthorised, as defined in section 17(8); intent to modify … Continue reading Zezev and Yarimaka v Governor of HM Prison Brixton and another: CACD 2002

Johnson v Gore Wood and Co: HL 14 Dec 2000

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

Regina v Sang: HL 25 Jul 1979

The defendant appealed against an unsuccessful application to exclude evidence where it was claimed there had been incitement by an agent provocateur. Held: The appeal failed. There is no defence of entrapment in English law. All evidence which is relevant is prima facie admissible in a criminal trial, although the trial judge has a discretion … Continue reading Regina v Sang: HL 25 Jul 1979

Love v National Crime Agency: 10 May 2016

(City of Westminster Magistrates Court) The NCA had made a request to the court for an order that the now claimant surrender, under the 1897 Act, passwords to encrypted computer files. An application had already been made under the 2000 Act, to which the claimant had replied that he did not have the passwords sought. … Continue reading Love v National Crime Agency: 10 May 2016

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