Click the case name for better results:

Jones and Milling, Olditch and Pritchard, and Richards v Gloucestershire Crown Prosecution Service: CACD 21 Jul 2004

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

McKerry v Teesdale and Wear Valley Justices; McKerry v Director of Public Prosecutions: CA 29 Feb 2000

The courts must recognise the need to protect the identity of children involved in criminal proceedings. This derived both from national statute and from international law and practice. Nevertheless, the court had the discretion in appropriate cases to order disclosure of the name of a child convicted before it of criminal charges where the public … Continue reading McKerry v Teesdale and Wear Valley Justices; McKerry v Director of Public Prosecutions: CA 29 Feb 2000

Goldsmith and Another v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: QBD 7 Jun 2001

The applicants were stopped after bringing into the country 26 kilos of tobacco, without declaring it. The customs applied for an order condemning the tobacco. The applicants argued that the proceedings were, in effect, criminal proceedings, and that, therefore, the reversal of the burden of proof was a breach of their right to a fair … Continue reading Goldsmith and Another v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: QBD 7 Jun 2001

Al Rabbat v Westminster Magistrates’ Court: Admn 31 Jul 2017

The claimant appealed against refusal of an application for judicial review in turn of a refusal to allow private prosecutions of Tony Blair, Jack Straw and Lord Goldsmith in respect of their involvement in the war in Iraq, and the alleged crime of aggression. Held: The international crime of aggression was established but it remained … Continue reading Al Rabbat v Westminster Magistrates’ Court: Admn 31 Jul 2017

AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others: SC 12 Oct 2011

Standing to Claim under A1P1 ECHR The appellants had written employers’ liability insurance policies. They appealed against rejection of their challenge to the 2009 Act which provided that asymptomatic pleural plaques, pleural thickening and asbestosis should constitute actionable harm for the purposes of an action of damages for personal injury. Held: The insurers’ appeals failed. … Continue reading AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others: SC 12 Oct 2011

Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others: HL 8 Mar 2006

In each case the local authority sought to recover possession of its own land. In the Lambeth case, they asserted this right as against an overstaying former tenant, and in the Leeds case as against gypsies. In each case the occupiers said that the recovery of possession interfered with their right respect for their family … Continue reading Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others: HL 8 Mar 2006

Engel And Others v The Netherlands (1): ECHR 8 Jun 1976

The court was asked whether proceedings in a military court against soldiers for disciplinary offences involved criminal charges within the meaning of Article 6(1): ‘In this connection, it is first necessary to know whether the provision(s) defining the offence charged belong, according to the legal system of the respondent State, to criminal law, disciplinary law … Continue reading Engel And Others v The Netherlands (1): ECHR 8 Jun 1976

London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Merrick and Thames Magistrates’ Court: Admn 17 Oct 2001

The authority requested a liability order for rates arrears over several years. On appeal, it was held that there was nothing in the regulations to a liability order to be restricted to one year. That a demand had to be served for each year did not require separate proceedings. Convenience and the minimising of costs … Continue reading London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Merrick and Thames Magistrates’ Court: Admn 17 Oct 2001

Regina v Jones (Margaret), Regina v Milling and others: HL 29 Mar 2006

Domestic Offence requires Domestic Defence Each defendant sought to raise by way of defence of their otherwise criminal actions, the fact that they were attempting to prevent the commission by the government of the crime of waging an aggressive war in Iraq, and that their acts were accordingly justified in law. Held: The law on … Continue reading Regina v Jones (Margaret), Regina v Milling and others: HL 29 Mar 2006

Gora and others v Commissioners of Customs and Excise and others: CA 11 Apr 2003

The appellants challenged decisions of the VAT and Duties Tribunal after seizure of their goods, and in particular whether the cases had been criminal or civil cases and following Roth, whether the respondent’s policy had been lawful and proportionate. Held: The present procedure does not involve the criminal courts and the absence of any criminal … Continue reading Gora and others v Commissioners of Customs and Excise and others: CA 11 Apr 2003

Revitt, Borg and Barnes v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 8 Sep 2006

The defendants appealed against refusal of leave to withdraw their pleas of guilty. They argued that the current practice infringed their human rights. Held: The magistrates had been correct not to allow the defendants to withdraw their pleas. Where a defendant makes an unequivocal plea of guilty which the court accepts, the defendant is thereupon … Continue reading Revitt, Borg and Barnes v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 8 Sep 2006

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

B v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary: QBD 5 Apr 2000

The defendant appealed the making of a sex offender order under 1998 Act. The justices had found that the defendant was a sex offender within section 2(1)(a) and that he had acted on a number of occasions in a way which brought him within section 2(1)(b). Held: The civil standard of proof is flexible and … Continue reading B v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary: QBD 5 Apr 2000

Lukaszewski v The District Court In Torun, Poland: SC 23 May 2012

Three of the appellants were Polish citizens resisting European Arrest Warrants. A fourth (H), a British citizen, faced extradition to the USA. An order for the extradition of eachhad been made, and acting under advice each filed a notice of appeal from prison. The legal services department of the Prison service relayed the notices to … Continue reading Lukaszewski v The District Court In Torun, Poland: SC 23 May 2012

North Somerset District Council v Honda Motor Europe Ltd and Others: QBD 2 Jul 2010

Deleayed Rates Claims Service made them Defective The council claimed that the defendants were liable for business rates. The defendants said that the notices were defective in not having been served ‘as soon as practicable’, and further that they should not be enforced since the delay had created substantial prejudice. The Council challenged the correctness … Continue reading North Somerset District Council v Honda Motor Europe Ltd and Others: QBD 2 Jul 2010

Norris v United States of America and others: HL 12 Mar 2008

The detainee appealed an order for extradition to the USA, saying that the offence (price-fixing) was not one known to English common law. The USA sought his extradition under the provisions of the Sherman Act. Held: It was not, and it would be wrong in principle to decide that it was: ‘The common law recognised … Continue reading Norris v United States of America and others: HL 12 Mar 2008

Robinson v Robinson (Practice Note): CA 2 Jan 1982

The husband was a serving soldier who had had various postings abroad. The wife returned home, where she discovered that she was pregnant. He followed her home, but she left him, and applied for maintenance. The justices found that she had deserted him, and that her behaviour was ‘gross and obvious misconduct’ and reduced her … Continue reading Robinson v Robinson (Practice Note): CA 2 Jan 1982

Regina (Kent Pharmaceuticals Ltd) v Serious Fraud Office: CA 11 Nov 2004

In 2002 the SFO was investigating allegations that drug companies were selling generic drugs, including penicillin-based antibiotics and warfarin, to the National Health Service at artificially sustained prices. To further the investigation the SFO obtained search warrants and executed them. The company challenged the release of the documents recovered to other government departments. They had … Continue reading Regina (Kent Pharmaceuticals Ltd) v Serious Fraud Office: CA 11 Nov 2004

RO v United Kingdom: ECHR 11 May 1994

(Commission) The applicant complained that the court had refused to allow him to withdraw his plea of guilty: ‘It is in the first place for the domestic authorities to determine rules regulating procedural aspects of criminal proceedings, subject to the supervisory jurisdiction of the Convention organs in considering the fairness of proceedings (cf. the Commission’s … Continue reading RO v United Kingdom: ECHR 11 May 1994

Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014

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

Wildman v Director of Public Prosecutions: CA 23 Jan 2001

Where the prosecutor intended to apply to extend the custody the time limit, he should not be required to produce full documentation in the same way as for the trial itself. Nevertheless, he should produce enough information, according to the circumstances, to allow the defendant properly to prepare his own submissions for the application. The … Continue reading Wildman v Director of Public Prosecutions: CA 23 Jan 2001

Idowu (Prosecution): ICO 15 Aug 2013

A probation officer who revealed a domestic abuse victim’s new address to the alleged perpetrator has been fined pounds 150 following a prosecution bought by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). Victoria Idowu claimed that she provided the victim’s full name, new address and date of birth, along with the details of the investigating officer, as … Continue reading Idowu (Prosecution): ICO 15 Aug 2013

HH v Deputy Prosecutor of The Italian Republic, Genoa: SC 20 Jun 2012

In each case the defendant sought to resist European Extradition Warrants saying that an order would be a disporportionate interference in their human right to family life. The Court asked whether its approach as set out in Norris, had to be amended in the light of the case of ZH. Held: HH and PH’s appeals … Continue reading HH v Deputy Prosecutor of The Italian Republic, Genoa: SC 20 Jun 2012

ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 1 Feb 2011

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

In re S (a Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication): HL 28 Oct 2004

Inherent High Court power may restrain Publicity The claimant child’s mother was to be tried for the murder of his brother by poisoning with salt. It was feared that the publicity which would normally attend a trial, would be damaging to S, and an application was made for reporting restrictions to be applied to avoid … Continue reading In re S (a Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication): HL 28 Oct 2004

Regina v Martin (Colin): CACD 29 Nov 1988

Defence of Necessity has a Place in Criminal Law The defendant appealed against his conviction for driving whilst disqualified. He said he had felt obliged to drive his stepson to work because his stepson had overslept. His wife (who had suicidal tendencies) had been threatening suicide unless he drove the boy to work, since she … Continue reading Regina v Martin (Colin): CACD 29 Nov 1988

Encon Insulation Ltd v Nottingham City Council: Admn 9 Jun 1999

When the rating authority discovered ratable premises, and issued claims going back in time the test was not whether they were unaware of them earlier, but whether they could have taken steps beforehand to discover the existence of the premises. A default by the council in taking the practicable steps available to them precluded any … Continue reading Encon Insulation Ltd v Nottingham City Council: Admn 9 Jun 1999

Louca v A German Judicial Authority: SC 19 Nov 2009

The defendant resisted extradition saying that the European Arrest Warrant was defective in not revealing the existence of two earlier such warrants. He said that absence of such information would hinder a court which was concerned as to possible abuse. Held: The appeal failed. The information was optional, and the information missing from the request … Continue reading Louca v A German Judicial Authority: SC 19 Nov 2009

Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission: HL 17 Dec 1968

There are no degrees of nullity The plaintiffs had owned mining property in Egypt. Their interests were damaged and or sequestrated and they sought compensation from the Respondent Commission. The plaintiffs brought an action for the declaration rejecting their claims was a nullity. The Commission replied that the courts were precluded from considering the question … Continue reading Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission: HL 17 Dec 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