There are limits as to what may be put to a witness by way of cross-examination as to credit. Lawton J said: ‘What, then, is the principle upon which the judge should draw the line? It seems to me that it is this. Since the purpose of cross-examination as to credit is to show that … Continue reading Regina v Sweet Escott: QBD 1971
Identification of Company’s Directing Mind In a prosecution under the 1968 Act, the court discussed how to identify the directing mind and will of a company, and whether employees remained liable when proper instructions had been given to those in charge of a local store. Held: ‘In the expression ‘act or default’ in section 23 … Continue reading Tesco Supermarkets Ltd v Nattrass: HL 31 Mar 1971
A husband had accidentally shot and killed his wife’s lover after threatening him with a shotgun.
Held: The court confirmed the decision at first instance. He was not liable to be indemnified by his insurers for the losses claimed against him . .
The Austrian District and Regional Real Property Transactions Commission refused to approve the sale of a number of plots of land. The applicant challenged the refusal alleging bias and contending that his article 6 rights were violated for that . .
It is a defence in criminal law to a charge of assault if the defendant had an honest belief that he was going to be attacked and reacted with proportionate force: ‘If there has been an attack so that defence is reasonably necessary, it should be . .
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 defendant appealed his conviction for causing criminal damage by fire saying that the charge sheet had not as required by the section, described it as arson. Held: the appeal failed. Whilst it was clearly desirable that a charge should include the word, section 1(3) was not mandatory in this respect. ‘Damage by Fire’ and … Continue reading Regina v Drayton: CACD 19 Jul 2005
The case concerned actions taken at military bases by way of protest against the Iraq war. Each raised questions arising from the prosecution of the appellants for offences of aggravated trespass. The defendants asserted, among other things, that there was ‘was a strong possibility’ that the activities being carried on at the bases were unlawful, … Continue reading Ayliffe and others v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 21 Apr 2005
The defendant, a vagrant, fell asleep in an empty house. His lighted cigarette fell onto his mattress, and a fire started. Rather than put it out, he moved to another room. He was accused of arson. Held: He was guilty. A defendant would be guilty even though he did not know he had started the … Continue reading Regina v Miller: HL 17 Mar 1982
When calculating the value of damage for the purpose of deciding whether an allegation of criminal damage could be referred to the Crown Court, the damage was the replacement value and not the consequential losses. An activist was accused of damaging genetically engineered crops. The replacement value was andpound;750, but the consequential losses amounted to … Continue reading Regina v Colchester Justices Ex Parte Abbott: QBD 13 Mar 2001
Application for judicial review of decision that a child, P, was fit to stand trial on accusations of offences under the 1971 and 1997 Acts. Judges: Wright J Citations:  EWHC 734 (Admin),  MHLR 304,  2 Cr App R 19,  Crim LR 657, (2002) 166 JP 641 Links: Bailii Statutes: Protection from … Continue reading P (A Minor), Regina (on the Application of) v Barking Youth Court: Admn 17 Apr 2002
The court considered the extent to which the defendants in the proceedings can rely on their beliefs as to the unlawfulness of the United Kingdom’s actions in preparing for, declaring, and waging war in Iraq in 2003 in a defence to a charge of criminal damage. Held: International law was to be allowed for in … Continue reading Jones and Milling, Olditch and Pritchard, and Richards v Gloucestershire Crown Prosecution Service: CACD 21 Jul 2004
The appellant challenged the dismissal of his private prosecution of the defendant in destroying a new garden wall. The magistrates had found a lawful excuse in that the defendant said that the wall had been constructed to obstruct his private right of way. Held: The use of self redress to justify criminal damage by lawful … Continue reading Chamberlain v Lindon: Admn 18 Mar 1998
The defendants were separately tried for possession of an article with intent to damage property contrary to section 3. In each case the article in question was a hacksaw blade and it was the prosecution case that each of the applicants intended to use one to cut part of the perimeter fence of a United … Continue reading Regina v Hill and Hall: CACD 1989
The defendant had been charged with setting fire to a guest room in an old people’s home. He claimed that he had done so to draw attention to a defective fire alarm system. He sought to set up a statutory defence under section 5(2) by claiming to have had a lawful excuse in doing what … Continue reading Regina v Hunt: CACD 1978
The defendant caused damage to a car. The appeal turned on the trial judge’s direction on the meaning of ‘reckless’. Held: The conviction was set aside. The judge had not adequately explained that the test to be applied was that of the defendant’s state of mind. ‘A man is reckless in the sense required when … Continue reading Regina v Briggs (Note): CACD 1977
The defendants tried to cut the wire fence around an American Air Force base to demonstrate their opposition to nuclear weapons. They were charged with possession of an article with intent to damage property. The judge ruled that the purported reason for having the articles did not fall within the definition of a lawful excuse … Continue reading Regina v Ashford and Smith: CACD 1988
Malcom had thrown petrol bombs at the outside wall of the bedroom of a girl who he believed had informed on him in relation to a series of burglaries. He had admitted throwing the bombs but claimed he had done so to frighten the girl and without realising that if a bomb had gone through … Continue reading Regina v Stephen Malcolm R: 1984
A 14-year old girl of low intelligence entered a shed, poured white spirit on the floor and set it alight. The fire destroyed the shed after she left. The allegation was that she was reckless. The justices applied Caldwell but inferred that in his reference to ‘an obvious risk’ Lord Diplock had meant a risk … Continue reading Elliott v C: 1983
Mr Lloyd had parked his car in a private car park with five large notices boards located at the entrance to and exit of this private car park positioned at eye-level for car drivers. All those notices warned that unauthorised vehicles would be immobilised. Mr Lloyd’s car was found clamped on his return. He contacted … Continue reading Lloyd v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 1992
The applicants each took part in an occupation of pods on the London Eye. They appealed convictions for threatening criminal damage, alleging the judge had misdirected the jury on the necessary ingredients of the offence. Held: Section 2, as opposed to section 1, did not refer to recklessness, requiring under either sub-section, the threat that … Continue reading Regina v Cakmak; Regina v Cavcav; Regina v Talay; Regina v Can etc: CACD 8 Feb 2002
The defendants, young boys, had set fire to paper and thrown the lit papers into a wheelie bin, expecting the fire to go out. In fact substantial damage was caused. The House was asked whether a conviction was proper under the section where the defendant had given no thought to a risk of damage, but … Continue reading Regina v G and R: HL 16 Oct 2003
Law relating to injury of animals worrying stock should be clarified; archaic language and conflicting provisions. Citations: Times 11-Dec-1997 Statutes: Protection of Animals Act 1911, Criminal Damage Act 1971 Animals Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.82439
In a temper the defendant broke a telephone by smashing the handset violently down on to the telephone unit. Held: Applying but modifying Briggs, the defendant had been fully aware of all the circumstances and, if ‘he did not know, as he said he did not, that there was some risk of damage, he was, … Continue reading Regina v Parker (Daryl): CACD 1977
Judges: Lord Justice Fulford, the Vice-President of the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Mr Justice Hilliard And Lord Hughes Citations:  EWCA Crim 108 Links: Bailii Statutes: Criminal Damage Act 1971 1(3) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Crime Updated: 28 March 2022; Ref: scu.671932
The respondent went to the house of a partner with whom he had a dispute, and fired three shots into the house. Nobody was injured. He had successfully appealed a conviction for criminal damage being reckless as to whether somebody else’s life should be endangered, having argued that any threat to life did not arise … Continue reading Regina v Steer: HL 2 Jul 1986
Spitting on a police officer’s coat was held to be such a minor ‘damage’ to the coat as not to be criminal damage within the meaning of the 1971 Act at all. Though spitting on a raincoat which was likely to be cleaned easily with a damp cloth did not amount to damage, the same … Continue reading A (A juvenile) v The Queen: 1978
The defendant broke two windows and damaged a curtain in the house of a stranger. She was drunk. She was charged under the 1971 Act, but she raised her honest but drunken and mistaken belief that the house belonged to a friend who would have consented to her breaking in and causing damage having told … Continue reading Jaggard v Dickinson: QBD 1980
The defendant got drunk and set fire to the hotel where he worked. Guests were present. He was indicted upon two counts of arson. He pleaded guilty to the 1(1) count but contested the 1(2) charge, saying he was so drunk that the thought there might . .
The defendants opposed the actions of DEFRA in trapping and then killing badgers. They were accused of criminal damage to the traps. They asserted a lawful excuse in seeking to release the badgers. While a wild animal was alive, there was no . .
Attendance of fire brigade of itself aggravates arson. . .
The defendant appealed against a sentence of six years imprisonment for arson being reckless as to whether life was endangered. He had set fire to his flat in a tower block. The neighbour was an elderly housebound lady. The offence was very serious, . .
Video evidence of a child witness was correctly admitted in an arson trial because of the threat of injury. . .
Damage done to protect one’s own child is not for the protection of property, and is no defence. . .
The 15 year old defendant appealed his conviction on the basis of recklessness, challenging, unsuccessfully, the rule in Caldwell.
Held: Because recklessness was to be judged by the standard of the reasonable prudent man, expert evidence of . .
The defendants were children accused of arson being reckless as to the danger of damage. They were not entitled to require the jury to consider as a separate question whether the risk of damage was obvious other than to an ordinary adult.
The defendant sought to sleep in a hollow in a haystack. He lit a fire, to keep warm, which set fire to the stack. He appealed against his conviction under the 1971 Act. He had a long history of schizophrenia and may not have had the same ability to . .
The appellant had smashed a statue of Lady Thatcher on loan from the House of Commons to the Corporation of London Art Collection. He was charged with an offence under section 1 of the 1971 Act, providing: ‘A person who without lawful excuse . .
The defendant was charged with criminal damage by setting fire to a building. It was owned by a company which in turn he owned.
Held: There is nothing unlawful about destroying one’s own property . .
(Bahamas) The defendant police had appealed the quantum of damages awarded to the claimant for assault and battery and false imprisonment and malicious prosecution, saying that she had been doubly compensated. The claimant now appealed reduction of her damages. The Bahamian police had subjected her to ‘Gestapo like tactics.’ Held: The several heads of damages … Continue reading Merson v Cartwright, The Attorney General: PC 13 Oct 2005
Each defendant appealed against convictions associated variously with the cultivation or possession of cannabis resin. They sought to plead medical necessity. There had been medical recommendations to move cannabis to the list of drugs which might be prescribed by a doctor, but this had been rejected. Held: The appeals failed. There was no over-arching principle … Continue reading Quayle and others v Regina, Attorney General’s Reference (No. 2 of 2004): CACD 27 May 2005
The defendants had had confiscation orders made against them. They had appealed on the basis that the orders were made more than six months after sentence. The prosecutor now appealed saying that the fact that the order were not timely did not invalidate them. Held: The appeal was allowed. The confiscation orders made by the … Continue reading Regina v Soneji and Bullen: HL 21 Jul 2005
The claimant wished to pursue his claim for defamation against the defendant, but was reluctant to return to the UK to give evidence, fearing arrest and extradition to the US. He appealed refusal of permission to be interviewed on video tape. Held (Majority): The appeal succeeded, and the judge’s order allowing the evidence to be … Continue reading Polanski v Conde Nast Publications Ltd: HL 10 Feb 2005
The defendant appealed an award of damages in favour of the applicant for assault by police officers whilst held in police custody. The said the judge should have allowed the claimant’s criminal record in in full. Held: The judge had directed the jury correctly. However as to damages, the award of exemplary damages was exessive, … Continue reading Watson v Cleveland Police: CA 12 Oct 2001
The claimant suffered back pain for which she required neurosurgery. The operation was associated with a 1-2% risk of the cauda equina syndrome, of which she was not warned. She went ahead with the surgery, and suffered that complication. The evidence established that cauda equina syndrome was a random and inherent risk of the surgery, … Continue reading Chester v Afshar: HL 14 Oct 2004
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
Parliament’s Approval if statute rights affected In a referendum, the people had voted to leave the European Union. That would require a notice to the Union under Article 50 TEU. The Secretary of State appealed against an order requiring Parliamentary approval before issuing the notice, he saying that the notice could be given under the … Continue reading Miller and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Exiting The European Union: SC 24 Jan 2017
An injunction had been granted to restrain Bovis from causing a noise nuisance outside certain hours specified in a notice served by the council under the 1974 Act which created a criminal offence ‘without reasonable excuse’ to contravene the notice. A number of informations were laid against Bovis but they were adjourned and the injunction … Continue reading City of London Corporation v Bovis Construction Ltd: CA 18 Apr 1988
The defendant, out of strong conviction, entered an art gallery and knocked the head from a statue of Margaret Thatcher. Held: The court examined the breadth of the defence of ‘lawful excuse’ to a charge of criminal damage, and whether a court could direct a jury to convict. Despite the possible defects in the direction, … Continue reading Kelleher, Regina v: CACD 20 Nov 2003
The improper use of machinery had resulted in the death of an employee, and the applicant was prosecuted under the 1974 Act, but complained that the prosecution should have been under the Regulations. The directive required member states to apply its regulations in replacement of any earlier legislation. The 1974 Act, it said was therefore … Continue reading Regina v Bristol Magistrates Court and others ex parte Junttan Oy: HL 23 Oct 2003
The defendant had been sentenced for offences of violence, but an additional period was imposed to protect the public. He had been refused leave for reconsideration of that part of his sentence after he completed the normal segment of his sentence. He wanted a consideration which would parallel the new won rights of review for … Continue reading Giles, Regina (on the Application of) v Parole Board and Another: HL 31 Jul 2003
The Court considered the validity of suspicionless stop and search activities under s 60 of the 1994 Act, by police officers. Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. The safeguards attending the use of the s 60 power, and in particular the requirements to give reasons both for the authorisation and for the stop and search, make … Continue reading Roberts, Regina (on the application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and another: SC 17 Dec 2015
The appellant had been detained in a mental hospital after a conviction. Later released, he was recalled, but he was not given written reasons as required by a DoH circular. However the SS referred the recall immediately to the Tribunal. He appealed from refusal of a finding that his subsequent detention had been unlawful. Held: … Continue reading Lee-Hirons v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 27 Jul 2016
The Home Secretary appealed against a finding that a non-derogating control order was unlawful in that, in restricting the subject to an 18 hour curfew and otherwise severely limiting his social contacts, the order amounted to such a deprivation of liberty as to be unlawful. Held: The appeal failed. When looking at the lawfulness of … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Home Department v JJ and others: HL 31 Oct 2007
The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the exemption continued until the papers were destroyed, or for 20 years under the 1958 Act. Held: The … Continue reading Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014
The applicant, a suspected Mafioso, had been detained in custody pending his trial. At the end of the maximum period of detention pending trial, he had been taken to an island where, he complained, he was unable to work, keep his family permanently with him, practise the Catholic religion or ensure his son’s education. Held: … Continue reading Guzzardi v Italy: ECHR 6 Nov 1980
The claimant had sought damages against his employer, saying that they had failed in their duty to him under the 1997 Act in failing to prevent harassment by a manager. He appealed a strike out of his claim. Held: The appeal succeeded. The issue is whether an employer may be vicariously liable under section 3 … Continue reading Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust: CA 16 Mar 2005
The applicant sought judicial review of an ordinance made by the commissioner for the British Indian Ocean Territory. An issue was raised whether the High Court in London had jurisdiction to entertain the proceedings and grant relief. Held: The court had jurisdiction. An Order in Council banishing British citizens from their home island was unlawful. … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Another, ex parte Bancoult: Admn 3 Nov 2000
Bail conditions only after detention B had been held under immigration detention, but released by SIAC, purportedly in conditional bail, after they found there was no realistic prospect of his deportation because he had not disclosed his true identity. The court was asked ‘whether there exists a power under the 1971 Act to grant immigration … Continue reading B (Algeria) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 8 Feb 2018
Administrative Discretion to be Used Reasonably The applicant challenged the manner of decision making as to the conditions which had been attached to its licence to open the cinema on Sundays. It had not been allowed to admit children under 15 years of age. The statute provided no appeal procedure, and the applicant sought a … Continue reading Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation: CA 10 Nov 1947
Two men were charged with theft from a company which they wholly owned and controlled. The court considered the actions of company directors in dishonestly appropriating the property of the company, and whether since the title to the goods was transferred, the goods had remained the property of the company. Held: The actions of the … Continue reading Attorney-General’s Reference (No. 2 of 1982): CACD 1984
An application to extradite a former head of state for an offence which was not at the time an offence under English law would fail, but could proceed in respect of allegations of acts after that time. No immunity was intended for heads of state. International law prohibiting torture has the character of jus cogens … Continue reading Regina v Bartle and Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte; Regina v Evans and Similar (No 3): HL 24 Mar 1999
Car hire companies who pursued actions in motorists’ names to recover the costs of hiring a replacement vehicle after an accident, from negligent drivers, were not acting in a champertous and unlawful manner. Lord Mustill said: ‘there exists in practical terms a gap in the remedies available to the motorist, from which the errant driver, … Continue reading Giles v Thompson, Devlin v Baslington (Conjoined Appeals): HL 1 Jun 1993
Blackmail was alleged under section 21 of the 1968 Act, the letter making the unwarranted demand with menaces having been posted from England to an intended victim in Germany. Held: The appeal was dismissed. To allow an English court to have jurisdiction where elements of the offence occurred abroad, the last act constituting the actus … Continue reading Treacy v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 1970
Police’s Complete Immunity was Too Wide (Grand Chamber) A male teacher developed an obsession with a male pupil. He changed his name by deed poll to the pupil’s surname. He was required to teach at another school. The pupil’s family’s property was subjected to numerous acts of vandalism, which the police investigated and in respect … Continue reading Osman v The United Kingdom: ECHR 28 Oct 1998
The deceased was a prisoner known to be at risk of committing suicide. Whilst in police custody he hanged himself in his prison cell. The Commissioner accepted that he was in breach of his duty of care to the deceased, but not that that breach was caustive of the death by suicide. Held: Police and … Continue reading Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis v Reeves (Joint Administratix of The Estate of Martin Lynch, Deceased): HL 15 Jul 1999
A diesel tank was in a yard which drained into a river. It was surrounded by a bund to contain spillage, but that protection was over ridden by an extension pipe from the tank to a drum outside the bund. Someone opened a tap on that pipe so that diesel flowed into the drum until … Continue reading Empress Car Company (Abertillery) Ltd v National Rivers Authority: HL 22 Jan 1998
The prisoner challenged the decision to place him in segregation under Prison Rule 43. Under rule 43(1) the initial power to segregate was given to ‘the governor’. The case arose from the fact that the governor of one prison had purported to authorise the segregation of a prisoner on his arrival at another prison to … Continue reading Regina v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison, Ex parte Hague, Weldon v Home Office: HL 24 Jul 1991
Presumption of Damage in Defamation is rebuttable The defendant complained that the presumption in English law that the victim of a libel had suffered damage was incompatible with his right to a fair trial. They said the statements complained of were repetitions of statements made by US authorities. The claimant had asserted that no more … Continue reading Dow Jones and Co Inc v Jameel: CA 3 Feb 2005
The defendant sought judicial review of his caution for possession of cannabis, saying that it went again the national guidance against such decisions after the reclassification of cannabis as a Class C banned substance. He had been arrested for a more serious allegation which could not be proved. Held: If the policy said that no … Continue reading Mondelly, Regina (on the Application of) v the Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis: Admn 29 Sep 2006
The claimant challenged being recalled to prison from licence after being found in an area from which he was excluded as a condition of his parole. Judges: Turner J Citations:  EWHC 729 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights 5, Criminal Justice Act 2003 244 254 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited … Continue reading Youngsam, Regina (on The Application of) v The Parole Board: Admn 7 Apr 2017
Reference to Parliamentary Papers behind Statute The inspector sought to tax the benefits in kind received by teachers at a private school in having their children educated at the school for free. Having agreed this was a taxable emolument, it was argued as to whether the taxable benefit was the cost to the employer, or … Continue reading Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart: HL 26 Nov 1992
The applicant sought assistance from the local authority. He suffered from spinal myeloma, was destitute and an asylum seeker. Held: Although the Act had withdrawn the obligation to provide assistance for many asylum seekers, those who were infirm and whose infirmity was not a consequence of their destitution, had not been excluded. Only able bodied … Continue reading Westminster City Council v National Asylum Support Service: HL 17 Oct 2002
Banker’s Liability for Negligent Reference The appellants were advertising agents. They were liable themselves for advertising space taken for a client, and had sought a financial reference from the defendant bankers to the client. The reference was negligent, but the bankers denied any assumption of a duty of care to a third party when purely … Continue reading Hedley Byrne and Co Ltd v Heller and Partners Ltd: HL 28 May 1963
The respondent had arrived and claimed asylum. Three claims were rejected, two of which were fraudulent. She had two children by a UK citizen, and if deported the result would be (the father being unsuitable) that the children would have to return with her. Held: The mother’s appeal succeeded. The court had to consider the … Continue reading ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 1 Feb 2011
The claimant sought an order quashing a search warrant, and for damages. The officer had said that he had evidence that the claimants were storing an distributing from the premises large quantities of counterfeit goods and drugs. Held: The warrants were unlawful, in that the magistrates had applied the wrong test for their issue, in … Continue reading Global Cash and Carry Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Birmingham Magistrates’ Court and Others: Admn 19 Feb 2013
The Authority appealed from refusal of judicial review of a circular issued by the respondent as to the supply of Plastic Baton Rounds and CS gas from central resources only. The authority suggested that the circular amounted to permission for the use of plastic baton rounds for the first time in England and Wales and … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex Parte Northumbria Police Authority: CA 18 Nov 1987
The defendant argued that as Governor and Chief Excecutive of Bayelsa State in Nigeria he had sovereign immunity. The Foreign Office had issued a certificate that the defendant was not a Head of States under the 1978 Act. The A-G of Bayelsa had certified that the defendant was a head of State but the A-G … Continue reading Alamieyeseigha, Regina (on the Application Of) v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 25 Nov 2005
The parties were former footballers and business partners they fell out and the defendant was said to have sent and extremely offensive text message. After a copy was published, the defendant published a press release which the claimant now said was defamatory. Held: The appeal failed. The events took place before the 2013 Act, and … Continue reading Elliott v Rufus: CA 20 Feb 2015
The deceased was shot by police officers raiding his flat in 1998. The claimants sought damages for his estate. They had succeeded in claiming damages for false imprisonment, but now appealed dismissal of their claim for damages for assault and misfeasance. The judge below had accepted that the officer had acted in self-defence, and entered … Continue reading Ashley and Another v Sussex Police: CA 27 Jul 2006
Claims had been made between neighbours in the course of a long running neighbour dispute. In particular a claim was made of malicious prosecution as regards a complaint made to the police.The claimant had ‘amply made out the third and fourth elements of this tort: the defendant made a false, entirely unfounded, and malicious accusation. … Continue reading Barkhuysen v Hamilton: QBD 10 Nov 2016
The Serious Fraud Office appealed against rulings on the admission of evidence after its exclusion under section 78. Held: The appeal was allowed. The appeal had been brought within time and could proceed. Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. The judge confused or elided two quite separate concepts, namely (a) the ‘identification’ principle which is … Continue reading A Ltd and Othersi, Regina v: CACD 28 Jul 2016
Power to call in is administrative in nature The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights to a fair hearing before … Continue reading Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others: HL 9 May 2001
The claimant sought judicial review of a decision to search him whilst travelling to a public protest in London. A previous demonstration involving this group had resulted in criminal damage, but neither the claimant nor his companions were found to be in possession of any materials for causing damage. The claimant said that the officer … Continue reading Howarth v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis: QBD 3 Nov 2011
The defendant published a film showing the claimant involved in sex acts with prostitutes. It characterised them as ‘Nazi’ style. He was the son of a fascist leader, and a chairman of an international sporting body. He denied any nazi element, and claimed in breach of confidence. Held: ‘The law [of confidence] now affords protection … Continue reading Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd: QBD 24 Jul 2008
The defendants said that the stop and search powers granted under the 2000 Act were too wide, and infringed their human rights. Each had been stopped when innocently attending demonstrations in London, and had been effectively detained for about twenty minutes or more before being allowed to continue. An authorisation had been granted by an … Continue reading Gillan, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Another: HL 8 Mar 2006
The claimants had been stopped by the police using powers in the 2000 Act. They were going to a demonstration outside an arms convention. There was no reason given for any suspicion that the searches were needed. Held: The powers given to the police were too wide, provided inadequate protection against abuse, and violated the … Continue reading Gillan and Quinton v The United Kingdom: ECHR 12 Jan 2010
The Court of Appeal issued habeas corpus because the applicant was committed to a mental institution pursuant to an application which was made by somebody who lacked the statutory authority to make it. The right of personal freedom is fundamental. In the mental health context, if someone is to be taken out of the community … Continue reading In re S-C (Mental Patient: Habeas Corpus): CA 22 Nov 1995
Article 50 Notice Requires Parliament’s Authority The applicant challenged a decision by the respondent that he could use Crown prerogative powers to issue a notice under section 50 TUE to initiate the United Kingdom leaving the EU following the referendum under the 2015 Act. Held: Once the notice had been given, it was irrevocable. Consultation … Continue reading Miller and Dos Santos v The Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union and Others: QBD 13 Nov 2016
The bank challenged measures taken by HM Treasury to restrict access to the United Kingdom’s financial markets by a major Iranian commercial bank, Bank Mellat, on the account of its alleged connection with Iran’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programmes. The bank sought to have the direction given under section 7 of the 2008 Act. … Continue reading Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2): SC 19 Jun 2013
Twins were conjoined (Siamese). Medically, both could not survive, and one was dependent upon the vital organs of the other. Doctors applied for permission to separate the twins which would be followed by the inevitable death of one of them. The parents, devout Roman Catholics, resisted. Held: The parents’ views were subject to the overriding … Continue reading In Re A (Minors) (Conjoined Twins: Medical Treatment); aka In re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation): CA 22 Sep 2000
The parties had arbitrated their dispute in London under a bilateral investment treaty between the US and Ecuador. The republic sought to appeal the arbitration. The applicant now appealed an order that the English High Court had jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The treaty was intended to encourage bilateral trading … Continue reading Occidental Exploration and Production Company vRepublic of Ecuador: CA 9 Sep 2005
Former HL decision in Siebe Gorman overruled The company had become insolvent. The bank had a debenture and claimed that its charge over the book debts had become a fixed charge. The preferential creditors said that the charge was a floating charge and that they took priority. Held: The appeal was allowed. The debenture, although … Continue reading National Westminster Bank plc v Spectrum Plus Limited and others: HL 30 Jun 2005