Click the case name for better results:

Paymaster (Jamaica) Ltd and Another v Grace Kennedy Remittance Services Ltd: PC 11 Dec 2017

(Court of Appeal of Jamaica) The parties disputed the ownership of copyight in certain computer software, and also an allegation of the misuse of confidential information. Judges: Lord Sumption, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hughes, Lord Hodge, Lord Briggs Citations: [2017] UKPC 40 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Robin Ray v Classic FM … Continue reading Paymaster (Jamaica) Ltd and Another v Grace Kennedy Remittance Services Ltd: PC 11 Dec 2017

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

Capital and Counties Plc and Another v Hampshire County Council; Etc: CA 20 Mar 1997

Three cases were brought against fire services after what were said to be negligent responses to call outs. On one, the fire brigade was called to a fire at office premises in Hampshire. The fire triggered the operation of a heat-activated sprinkler system, but on arrival a fire brigade officer gave instructions for the sprinkler … Continue reading Capital and Counties Plc and Another v Hampshire County Council; Etc: CA 20 Mar 1997

Osman v The United Kingdom: ECHR 28 Oct 1998

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

Entick v Carrington: KBD 1765

The Property of Every Man is Sacred The King’s Messengers entered the plaintiff’s house and seized his papers under a warrant issued by the Secretary of State, a government minister. Held: The common law does not recognise interests of state as a justification for allowing what would otherwise be an unlawful search. Lord Camden CJ … Continue reading Entick v Carrington: KBD 1765

R Griggs Group Ltd and others v Evans and others (No 2): ChD 12 May 2004

A logo had been created for the claimants, by an independent sub-contractor. They sought assignment of their legal title, but, knowing of the claimant’s interest the copyright was assigned to a third party out of the jurisdiction. The claimant sought an order for its transfer, and an order was so made. Before it was perfected … Continue reading R Griggs Group Ltd and others v Evans and others (No 2): ChD 12 May 2004

Barber v Somerset County Council: HL 1 Apr 2004

A teacher sought damages from his employer after suffering a work related stress breakdown. Held: The definition of the work expected of him did not justify the demand placed upon him. The employer could have checked up on him during his sickness absences, and given him support. It did not do so. It was liable.Lord … Continue reading Barber v Somerset County Council: HL 1 Apr 2004

Matthews v Ministry of Defence: HL 13 Feb 2003

The claimant sought damages against the Crown, having suffered asbestosis whilst in the armed forces. He challenged the denial to him of a right of action by the 1947 Act. Held: Human rights law did not create civil rights, but rather voided procedural bars to their enforcement. The issue of what is a substantive and … Continue reading Matthews v Ministry of Defence: HL 13 Feb 2003

Mersey Docks and Harbour Board v Coggins and Griffith (Liverpool) Ltd: HL 1946

Employers Liability for Worker’s Negligence A worker was injured by a negligently driven crane. The crane and Board’s driver were hired out to stevedores for loading work. The stevedores controlled the crane’s operations, but did not direct how the driver controlled the crane. The hire contract made the driver the employee of the defendant stevedores. … Continue reading Mersey Docks and Harbour Board v Coggins and Griffith (Liverpool) Ltd: HL 1946

W Devis and Sons Ltd v Atkins: HL 6 Jul 1977

The ‘just and equitable’ test warranted the reduction or extinction of compensation for an employee who has been unfairly dismissed and then found to have been liable to summary dismissal. ‘The paragraph does not, nor did s. 116 of the Act of 1971, provide that regard should be had only to the loss resulting from … Continue reading W Devis and Sons Ltd v Atkins: HL 6 Jul 1977