The appellant had applied for and been refused disability living allowance on the basis of being able to carry out certain cooking tasks. Held: The purpose of the ‘cooking test’ is not to ascertain whether the applicant can survive, or enjoy a reasonable diet, without assistance. It is a notional test, a thought-experiment, to calibrate … Continue reading Moyna v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: HL 31 Jul 2003
A consignment of whisky was stolen whilst on consignemt from a bonded warehouse under CMR terms for Teheran. In bond, it was worth 7,000 pounds, and on export no excise duty was to be paid. Being stolen in the course of transit, excise duty of . .
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 court considered the tort of malicious prosecution when committed by a police officer, saying ‘But these cases must be carefully watched so as to see that there really is some evidence from his conduct that he knew it was a groundless charge.’ A charging officer is simply required to make an assessment of whether … Continue reading Glinski v McIver: HL 1962
(Hong Kong) The defendant was an Afghan subject with the British Army in Hong Kong. He was accused of murder. Having accepted the protection of the British Armed forces, he became subject to their laws. In custody, he was asked about the offence by a senior officer, and admitted the act. He appealed on the … Continue reading Ibrahim v The King: PC 6 Mar 1914
Unilateral Contract Liability The defendants advertised ‘The Carbolic Smoke Ball,’ in the Pall Mall Gazette, saying ‘pounds 100 reward will be paid by the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company to any person who contracts the increasing epidemic influenza, colds, or any disease caused by taking cold, after having used the ball three times daily for two … Continue reading Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co: CA 7 Dec 1892
