The claimants sought leave to appeal against a finding that they had no cause of action for their expulsion from their islands.
Held: ‘Exile without colour of law is forbidden by Magna Carta. That it can amount to a public law wrong is already . .
The commissioners sought to claim title to a foreshore by adverse possession. The claimant asserted that he had acquired title in his capacity of Lord Marcher of Magor which had owned the bed of the estuary since the Norman Conquest, and that the Crown could not acquire title by adverse possession, by a wrong against … Continue reading Roberts v Crown Estate Commissioners: CA 20 Feb 2008
The court described the peculiarly difficult position of a solicitor sued for the negligence of losing litigation for his client by reason of having his client’s claim struck out: ‘It is true that if the action for professional negligence were fought, the court which tried it would have to assess what those chances were. But … Continue reading Allen v Sir Alfred McAlpine and Sons Ltd: CA 1968
Appeals against a judge’s use of his judicial discretion exercised on the extension of time for commencement of proceedings will succeed only with difficulty. Citations: Times 19-May-1994, [1995] PIQR 135 Statutes: Limitation Act 1980 33(1)(a) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Chagos Islanders v Attorney-General and Another CA 22-Jul-2004 The claimants sought leave … Continue reading Yates v Thakeham Tiles Ltd: CA 19 May 1994
VDT EXCISE – seizure of vehicle and goods – whether seizure challenged – restoration refused – whether appeal against non-restoration of vehicle – whether decision not to restore goods proportionate – whether appellant entitled to raise issue of own use – whether abuse of process – No JURISDICTION – Whether criminal charge – Whether Magna … Continue reading Davidson v Revenue and Customs: Excs 25 Jul 2008
The complainant has requested when and how the Magna Carta (1215) was superseded, overturned or repealed. The Commissioner’s decision is that the House of Lords does not hold the requested information. Section of Act/EIR and Finding: FOI 1 – Complaint Not upheld Citations: [2013] UKICO FS50464067 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Information Updated: 12 … Continue reading House of Lords (Decision Notice): ICO 4 Mar 2013
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as unlawful the respondent’s, at first unpublished, policy introduced in 2006, that by default, those awaiting deportation should be … Continue reading Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 23 Mar 2011
VDT DEFAULT SURCHARGE – Reasonable excuse – Pressure on taxpayer – Alleged blackmail of taxpayer by Inland Revenue – Alleged misfeasance by Court Service – Taxpayer’s time taken in resisting alleged wrongs – Whether reasonable excuse – No – Taxpayer’s wife acting as book-keeper – Taxpayer’s wife’s illness – Whether reasonable excuse – Not after … Continue reading Garde v Customs and Excise: VDT 25 Apr 2005
Appeal by the Council against a decision of the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal relating to ‘IC’, a boy aged 5 years old who has global development delay and associated learning difficulties. Held: When deciding whether to provide the eduction requested by the parents rather than that specified in the statemen of educational needs, … Continue reading Slough Borough Council v C, Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal: QBD 22 Jul 2004
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
Lord Donaldson of Lyminton MR said: ‘Chapters 39 and 40 of Magna Carta provide:No freeman shall be arrested or imprisoned or disseised or outlawed or exiled or in any way destroyed, neither will we set forth against him or send against him, except by the lawful judgment of his peers and by the law of … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Ex parte Muboyayi: CA 1992
The claimants challenged the 2004 Order which prevented their return to their homes on the Chagos Islands. The islanders had been taken off the island to leave it for use as a US airbase. In 2004, the island was no longer needed, and payment had been made (ineffectively) to assist the dispossessed islanders, but an … Continue reading Bancoult, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 2): HL 22 Oct 2008
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
Misfeasance in Public Office – Recklessness The bank sought to strike out the claim alleging misfeasance in public office in having failed to regulate the failed bank, BCCI. Held: Misfeasance in public office might occur not only when a company officer acted to injure a party, but also where he acted with knowledge of, or … Continue reading Three Rivers District Council and Others v Governor and Company of The Bank of England (No 3): HL 22 Mar 2001
The claimant had been found to have been wrongfully detained under section 3. He appealed against rejection of his claim for judicial review and for damages. The court found that his detention was lawful until declared otherwise. He argued that the restriction on compensation under the 1983 Act contravened the ECHR. Held: The detention was … Continue reading TTM v London Borough of Hackney and Others: CA 14 Jan 2011
The claimant, displaced from the Chagos Archipelago, challenged a decision by the respondent to create a no-take Marine Protected Area arround the island which would make life there impossible if he and others returned. The respondent renewed his objection to the use of leaked materials, saying that this would be a breach of the Official … Continue reading Bancoult, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs: Admn 11 Jun 2013
The defendant appealed against the judge’s findings as to fact delivered some 22 months after the hearing. Held: The appeal failed. Though such a delay must require the court carefully to investigate the judgment, it did not of itself invalidate it. Arden LJ said: ‘An unreasonable delay of this kind reflects adversely on the reputation … Continue reading Bond v Dunster Properties Ltd and Others: CA 21 Apr 2011
An action for negligence against a solicitor was defended by saying that the claim was out of time. The claimant responded that the solicitor had not told him of the circumstances which would lead to the claim, and that deliberate concealment should extend the limitation period. Held: Brocklesby was wrongly decided. Section 32 should deprive … Continue reading Cave v Robinson Jarvis and Rolf (a Firm): HL 25 Apr 2002
The plaintiffs were French producers of turkeys. They alleged that the Minister revoked their licence to import turkeys into this country by a decision that was ultra vires and motivated by a desire to assist British turkey producers, and that this . .
The Chagos Islands had been a British dependent territory since 1814. The British government repatriated the islanders in the 1960s, and the Ilois now sought damages for their wrongful displacement, misfeasance, deceit, negligence and to establish a . .
A plaintiff can allege misfeasance in public office against a body such as a local authority or a government ministry. The tort was well establshed. . .
The claimant sought to have set aside a decision of the House of Lords as to the validity of the 2004 Order, saying that it had been based on a failure by the defendant properly to disclose matters it was under a duty of candour to disclose.
The claimant on behalf of himself and other islanders sought a declaration that the 2004 Order was unlawful. The islands had been emptied of people in 1973 and before in order to allow use of the islands as military bases. He had enjoyed a right to . .
References: [2008] UKVAT-Excise E01127 Links: Bailii Ratio: VDT EXCISE – seizure of vehicle and goods – whether seizure challenged – restoration refused – whether appeal against non-restoration of vehicle – whether decision not to restore goods proportionate – whether appellant entitled to raise issue of own use – whether abuse of process – No JURISDICTION … Continue reading Davidson v Revenue and Customs; Excs 25 Jul 2008
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
