Click the case name for better results:

Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Newcastle Licensing Justices and others: Admn 31 Jul 2003

The claimants objected to a forced transfer of an unused justices on-line for the benefit of the licencee applicants. The licensees had first been refused a licence for certain premises, but then requested and were given transfer of an obsolete licence for nearby premises. The claimants, neighbours, asserted an infringement of their human rights. Held: … Continue reading Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Newcastle Licensing Justices and others: Admn 31 Jul 2003

Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Newcastle Upon Tyne Licensing Justices and Another: HL 15 Feb 2006

Licensees appealed against the grant of judicial review of decisions granting special removal of old on-licences for premises. The grant had been challenged on the basis that the magistrates had had no jurisdiction to make the award because the premises were unoccupied. The relevant legislation had been repealed by the time the matter reached the … Continue reading Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Newcastle Upon Tyne Licensing Justices and Another: HL 15 Feb 2006

Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application Of) v Newcastle Licensing Justices and others: CA 25 Jun 2004

The applicant sought special removal of a justices on-licence from former premises to its new premises. Held: The special removal procedure was limited to circumstances of urgency. The applicant had to show that the circumstances fell within the section, and that the premises were about to be pulled down or occupied. The section did not … Continue reading Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application Of) v Newcastle Licensing Justices and others: CA 25 Jun 2004

Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Newcastle Upon Tyne Licensing Justices and others: Admn 15 Mar 2004

Objection was made to the removal of an old on-license by the magistrates. Held: The justices had had no jurisdiction under section 15 because, at the time the application came before the justices, the premises of Mim’s Bar were not ‘occupied’ or about to be ‘occupied’ for a ‘public purpose’ within the meaning of section … Continue reading Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Newcastle Upon Tyne Licensing Justices and others: Admn 15 Mar 2004

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

Hedley Byrne and Co Ltd v Heller and Partners Ltd: HL 28 May 1963

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

Glaister and Others v Appelby-In-Westmorland Town Council: CA 9 Dec 2009

The claimant was injured when at a horse fair. A loose horse kicked him causing injury. They claimed in negligence against the council for licensing the fair without ensuring that public liability insurance. The Council now appealed agaiinst a finding that they were liable, saying that this had been a wrongful extension of the law … Continue reading Glaister and Others v Appelby-In-Westmorland Town Council: CA 9 Dec 2009

Fitzpatrick v Sterling Housing Association Ltd: HL 28 Oct 1999

Same Sex Paartner to Inherit as Family Member The claimant had lived with the original tenant in a stable and long standing homosexual relationship at the deceased’s flat. After the tenant’s death he sought a statutory tenancy as a spouse of the deceased. The Act had been extended to include as a spouse someone living … Continue reading Fitzpatrick v Sterling Housing Association Ltd: HL 28 Oct 1999

Regina v Disciplinary Committee of the Jockey Club, ex parte Aga Khan: CA 4 Dec 1992

No Judicial Review of Decisions of Private Body Despite the wide range of its powers, the disciplinary committee of the Jockey Club remains a domestic tribunal. Judicial review is not available to a member. Tne relationship is in contract between the club and its member. Sir Thomas Bingham MR: ‘No serious racecourse management, owner, trainer … Continue reading Regina v Disciplinary Committee of the Jockey Club, ex parte Aga Khan: CA 4 Dec 1992