The fact that a defendant has previous convictions is not normally relevant: ‘The fundamental principle, equally applicable to any question that is asked by the defence as to any question that is asked by the prosecution, is that it is not normally relevant to inquire into a prisoner’s previous character, and, particularly, to ask questions … Continue reading Regina v Miller: 1952
The defendant had been arrested for murders of young girls, but after being found unfit to plead, he was committed to Broadmoor. While he escaped another girl was murdered, and he was charged. The prosecutor sought to bring in evidence of admissions made at Broadmoor and of the earlier allegations. Held: The Judges’ Rules were … Continue reading Regina v Straffen: CCA 20 Aug 1952
The applicant had been charged before the justices with indictable offences. He consented to summary trial but it had not been explained to him that he might be committed to the Quarter Sessions for sentence. Held: The court allowed certiorari.Lord Goddard CJ described the statutory provisions in question as ‘peremptory’ because ‘for many centuries in … Continue reading Regina v Kent Justices, Ex parte Machin: 1952
The House was asked whether a disciplinary decision by a governor was amenable to judicial review. Held: The functions of a governor adjudicating upon disciplinary charges are separate and distinct from his functions in running the prison; they are subject to the supervision of the courts in their compliance with the rules of natural justice. … Continue reading Leech v Governor of Parkhurst Prison: HL 1988
The House gave guidance how it would treat an invitation to depart from a previous decision of the House. Such a course was possible, but the direction was not an ‘open sesame’ for a differently constituted committee to prefer their views to those of the committee which determined the decision unanimously or by a majority. … Continue reading Practice Statement (Judicial Precedent): HL 1966
The plaintiff had ridden on the back of a kind of tractor in a quarry and in defiance of his employer’s instructions, risking being thrown off and injured. Another vehicle ran into the back of the first vehicle, injuring the plaintiff. He contended that his damages should not be reduced because although it was foreseeable … Continue reading Jones v Livox Quarries: CA 25 Apr 1952
The claimant, a prisoner, alleged false imprisonment. The prison officers had taken unlawful strike action leaving him to be confined within his cell and unable to be involved in his normal activities. In view of the strike, a governor’s order had been issued confining the prisoners within their cells. The Association appealed against a finding … Continue reading Prison Officers Association v Iqbal: CA 4 Dec 2009
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
Appeal by the Crown against the trial judge’s ruling rejecting the submission that the offence of bringing a prohibited article into prison under section 40C(1)(a) of the Prison Act 1952 as amended is an offence of absolute or strict liability which . .
The appellant pleaded guilty to two counts of bringing a prohibited article into prison. The first of those counts related to a List A item (cannabis), contrary to section 40B(1) of the Prison Act 1952. The second count related to a List B item (a . .
The League challenged the respondent’s statement in the Prisons’ Handbook that children held in young offender institutions were not subject to the protection of the 1989 Act. Held: Neither the Prison Act and Rules excluded the Prison authorities from the list of those required to co-operate with local authorities in the exercise of their duties … Continue reading Regina (Howard League for Penal Reform) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: QBD 29 Nov 2002
The applicant was mentally ill, and had at various times received inpatient treatment, and also detained. After conviction for harassment offences he was imprisoned, but then again hospitalized and detained under s3 whilst released in licence. Upon his impending release from hospital, the respondent ordered him to be returned to prison. He absconded form the … Continue reading Regina (S) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: QBD 5 Nov 2002
The applicant sought review of a decision to remove him from a witness protection scheme within the prison. He claimed that having been promised protection, he had a legitimate expectation of protection, having been told he would receive protection while he was in prison. He had not eventually been relied upon as a witness. Held: … Continue reading Bloggs 61, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 18 Jun 2003
The prisoner complained that having written an autobiography, the manuscript materials had been withheld, and that this interfered with his rights of freedom of expression. Held: Such an action by the prison authorities was not incompatible with the prisoner’s rights. The materials were not privileged, but were intended for publication contrary to the standing orders. … Continue reading Nilsen, Regina (on the Application of) v Governor of HMP Full Sutton and Another: Admn 19 Dec 2003
A full restriction on the use of material emanating from a prison visit was unlawful as an interference with the right of free speech of the prisoner: ‘The blanket prohibition on making use of material obtained in a visit is not, on the evidence before me, therefore justified as the minimum interference necessary with the … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Ian Simms and Michael Alan Mark O’Brien: QBD 19 Dec 1996
To establish a breach of Article 3 the Claimant must show he has suffered the ill- treatment he alleges, and that it amounts to a violation of Article 3. The claimant prisoners complained that a lack of in-cell sanitation infringed their human rights, and particularly so when confined to their cells for 13 hours overnight. … Continue reading Grant and Another v The Ministry of Justice: QBD 19 Dec 2011
The claimant challenged the lawfulness of his detention between 15 January and 4 March 2021 (‘the unlawful detention challenge’). He was arrested on 15 January 2021 on the basis that he was unlawfully at large and returned to prison to serve the remainder of the determinate sentence imposed by Southwark Crown Court on 9 February … Continue reading Kessie-Adjei, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: Admn 30 Mar 2022
Prison officers may not refuse to accept responsibility for prisoners properly committed to the care of the prison by the courts. Citations: Times 19-Dec-1994 Statutes: Prison Act 1952 8 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Employment Updated: 14 April 2022; Ref: scu.89108
The Prison Service’s policy of refusing to allow children over the age of eighteen months to stay with their mother in prison was lawful. The impairment of family life was an inevitable and inherent part of the imposition of a sentence of imprisonment. The policy was to designed allow for the protection of children’s interests … Continue reading Regina (P) v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Regina (Q) v Same: QBD 1 Jun 2001
Appeal against conviction (on plea) of smuggling drugs and mobile SIM cards into prison. His defence statement indicated that he had acted under pressure and in ignorance. Held: The appeal failed. A charge under either section 40B(1)(a) or section 40C(1)(a) of the Prison Act 1952 was proved once it was established that the defendant knew … Continue reading Johnson, Regina v: CACD 10 Mar 2017
Ban on Prisoners talking to Journalists unlawful The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without undertakings from the journalists not to publish any element of the interview. … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms: HL 8 Jul 1999
The prisoner, sentenced to life imprisonment with a whole life tariff for the murders of children, now appealed against the imposition of the whole life tarriff. Held: The appeal failed. It was possible for a Home Secretary to set a whole life tariff for a person subject to a compulsory sentence of life imprisonment, provided … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Hindley: HL 30 Mar 2000
The prisoner challenged a decision for his return to closed from open conditions King J  EWHC 1019 (Admin) Bailii Prison Act 1952 12 Prisons Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.563230
The applicants, incarcerated at Long Lartin pending extradition or deportation, challenged a decision further restricting their movements within the prison. All were unconvicted, and all but one were suspected of terrorist crimes. The changes were made in response to the transfer to the unit of one particular prisoner. Held: Despite the changes given in the … Continue reading Bary and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another: Admn 19 Mar 2010
The claimant challenged his prisoner classification and risk assessment which led to him being held at a high security prison. He was over 60 years old, and in poor health. Held: The request for review failed. The court was satisfied that at all stages, full account has been taken of the possible impact of the … Continue reading Walker v Secretary of State for Justice: Admn 16 Dec 2009
The defendant prison governor had intercepted a prisoner’s letter to the Crown Office for the purpose of raising proceedings to have the governor committed for an alleged contempt of court. Held: The governor was in contempt of court. Subject to any legislation altering the situation, a prisoner retains all his rights that are not taken … Continue reading Raymond v Honey: HL 4 Mar 1981
Having committed an offence whilst on licence, the judge had sentenced the defendant to a term of imprisonment to follow completion of the original sentence. The order drawn up by the clerk recorded that it should be served concurrently. He served . .
The claimant prisoner who had a learning disability said that he had been unable to complete the offending behaviour programmes because of his disability, that he had been kept in prison for much longer than he should have been as a consequence, and . .
The life prisoner had been recommended for transfer to open conditions on three occasions, but the advice had not been followed by the respondent. The prisoner sought judicial review. . .
The claimant prisoner objected to the defendant’s policies that male prisoners were not to be allowed to refuse ‘rub-down’ searches by female prison officers, save on religious or cultural grounds. He said that the exceptions were too tightly . .
Appeal, with permission against a judgment dismissing the appellant’s application for judicial review seeking an order that the defendant Secretary of State provide or facilitate the provision of information to stated categories of children as to . .
The defendant appealed against his conviction for conveying ‘List A’ articles into prison. He said that the proceedings had been a nullity for failure to comply with the requirements of Schedule 3 of the 1998 Act. He had not been notified of the . .
The United Kingdom’s ban on homosexuals within the armed forces was a breach of the applicants’ right to respect for their private and family life. Applicants had also been denied an effective remedy under the Convention. The investigations into . .
The patient had been released on licence from prison. He later refused treatment for mental illness and was detained under the 1983 Act, though still on licence. His probation obtained the revocation of his licence, and he was recalled. He did not . .
The claimant said that whilst he had been detained at a Young Offender Institute, he had been subjected to the Disclipline Incident Reports systems, which he now said was an unlawful interference in his human rights.
Held: As to one system, . .
The prisoner had been released on licence early by mistake. The court was asked whether he was to be treated as having been unlawfuly at large. . .
Four prisoners challenged the refusal to grant them enhanced status under the prison’s Incentives and Earned Privileges Scheme. Each maintained a denial of guilt and so was not eligible for a treatment programme.
Held: The applications failed. . .
The claimant appealed against rejection of his claim for discrimination when under the 1952 Act, there was a requirement to appoint a member as pastor of the prison a Clergyman of the Church of England, and other chaplains, including himself, an . .
Challenge to prisoners altered classification as category A prisoner. . .
The claimants were awarded damages, following the way they were searched on seeking to enter prison on a visit. The Home Office appealed. They were asked to sign a consent form, but only after the search was nearly complete. They were told the . .
The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without . .
The accused had been charged with the murder of an infant who had been given into their care by the child’s mother after payment of a fee. They appealed after admission of evidence that several other infants had been received by the accused persons from other mothers and that their bodies were found buried in … Continue reading Makin v Attorney-General for New South Wales: PC 12 Dec 1893
The claimant was disabled, and sought sterilisation because she feared the additional difficulties she would face as a mother. The sterilisation failed. She sought damages. Held: The House having considered the issue in MacFarlane only recently it was inappropriate to change the rules set down in that case. Nothing had been put forward to argue … Continue reading Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust: HL 16 Oct 2003
The claimant and her son sought to visit her other son in Leeds Prison. He was suspected of involvement in drugs, and therefore she was subjected to strip searches. There was no statutory support for the search. The son’s penis had been touched which was a battery. Held: The policy considerations which limit the heads … Continue reading Wainwright and another v Home Office: HL 16 Oct 2003
The appellant sought to resist the registration here of a confiscation order made in the US. She argued it would be contrary to the interests of justice to register it, that the US procedure would be unlawful here under the Convention, the appeal having been held in her absence. Held: It could not be said … Continue reading Barnette v Government of the United States of America; United States Government v Montgomery (No 2): CA 24 Mar 2003
(Cayman Islands) The respondent worked for a bank. He disclosed a business interest, but that interest grew in importance to the point where he resigned in circumstances amounting to constructive dismissal. His home and business officers were raided and searched by the police. Nothing incriminating was found. He claimed damages saying the search warrrant had … Continue reading Gibbs and others v Rea: PC 29 Jan 1998
The defendant prisoner had been disciplined for using a racist term against a prison officer. He complained that the failure to give reasons for the finding of guilt made the decision void. Held: The disciplinary proceedings could lead to loss of remission, and therefore his liberty was at stake. However there was no statutory duty … Continue reading Regina (Gleaves) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: QBD 10 Nov 2004
The claimant had sought damages against his employer, saying that they had failed in their duty to him under the 1997 Act in failing to prevent harassment by a manager. He appealed a strike out of his claim. Held: The appeal succeeded. The issue is whether an employer may be vicariously liable under section 3 … Continue reading Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust: CA 16 Mar 2005
The widow of the deceased sought damages after his exposure to asbestos whilst working for the defendant. He had contracted lung cancer. The defendant argued that the deceased had continued to smoke knowing of the risks, and that he had made a significant contribution to his getting lung cancer. Held: The damages should be reduced … Continue reading Badger v The Ministry of Defence: QBD 16 Dec 2005
The applicant complained about the compatibility with the European Convention of the Prisons rule 74(4) which provided that ‘every letter to or from a prisoner shall be read by the Governor . . and it shall be within the discretion of the Governor to stop any letter if he considers that the contents are objectionable.’ … Continue reading Campbell v The United Kingdom: ECHR 25 Mar 1992
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
Discussing the need for a judge not to sum up too strongly against a defendant: ‘in England a man is entitled to a fair trial by jury on any offence which is indictable. It does not matter how absurd the defence is, or how unlikely it is that any sensible person would pay the least … Continue reading Rex v Canny: 1945
In this case it was held that the trial judge had gone too far in his comments and could not really be said to have put the defendant’s case to the jury. ‘We cannot allow a summing up which puts the case so strongly against the prisoner to stand…’ Judges: Lord Reading CJ Citations: (1917) … Continue reading Rex v Frampton: 1917
The appeal court considered the position of a defendant where the judge had summed up strongly against him: ‘ . . a judge, when directing a jury, is clearly entitled to express his opinion on the facts of the case, provided that he leaves the issues of fact to the jury to determine. A judge … Continue reading Rex v O’Donnell: 1917
Lord Goddard discussed again the direction to the jury as to the standard of proof: ‘I think it is very unfortunate to talk to juries about reasonable doubt, because the explanations given of what is and what is not a reasonable doubt are so very often extraordinarily difficult to follow and it is very difficult … Continue reading Regina v Hepworth and Fearnley: 1955
The defendant had given a positive breath test. The laboratory test showed a urine/alcohol proportion above the prescribed limit. He was warned that proceedings were possible. The summons was issued within the six months’ period prescribed by the Act, but service was delayed for over two years. He objected that any hearing would be contrary … Continue reading Regina v Oxford City Justices, ex parte Smith: QBD 1982
The claimants sought damages for injuries alleged to have been received at the hands of prison officers whilst in prison. They now sought disclosure by the police of statements made to the police during the course of their investigation. Held: The court ordered the police to disclose witness statements obtained during a criminal investigation, because … Continue reading Frankson and Others v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Johns v Same: CA 8 May 2003
There are three steps in every case where a party seeks disclosure from a third party: ‘(1) First it has to be shown that the documentation is likely to support the case of the applicant or adversely affect the case of the respondent. The word ‘likely’ has been interpreted by the Court of Appeal in … Continue reading Clifford v NGN Ltd and Mulcaire: ChD 3 Feb 2010
The appellant had been convicted under the 1952 Act of being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent importation of controlled drugs. She was sentenced to imprisonment on her plea. More than three months later, application was made to forfeit the money found on arrest. The court inferred that the whole of the money had been provided … Continue reading Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Menocal: HL 1979
(Scotland) The pursuers were the widow and daughter of a tenant of the respondent who had been violently killed by his neighbour. They said that the respondent, knowing of the neighbour’s violent behaviours had a duty of care to the deceased and should have removed the neighbour, or warned them when their attempts to remove … Continue reading Mitchell and Another v Glasgow City Council: HL 18 Feb 2009
Foreseeability Standard to Establish Negligence Complaint was made that oil had been discharged into Sydney Harbour causing damage. The court differentiated damage by fire from other types of physical damage to property for the purposes of liability in tort, saying ‘We have come back to the plain common sense stated by Lord Russell of Killowen … Continue reading Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd (The Wagon Mound No 1): PC 18 Jan 1961
An order by a prison governor that a prisoner must submit to a random drug test depended for its lawfulness upon the selection being genuinely random. The order to submit and the order to attend for the test could not be separated. Although in fact the repeated selection of the prisoner, whilst genuinely random, had … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Others, Ex Parte Russell: QBD 31 Aug 2000
Prison officers may not, in the course of an employment dispute, refuse to accept prisoners into the prison after they had been properly committed to the care of the prison in which they worked. Citations: Independent 23-Nov-1994 Statutes: Prisons Act 1952 8 Employment, Administrative, Prisons Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81457
The defendant had been convicted of murder in 1952, and hung. A court hearing an appeal after many years must apply laws from different eras to different aspects. The law of the offence (of murder) to be applied was that at the time of the offence. In this case however the summing up was so … Continue reading Regina v Derek William Bentley (Deceased): CACD 30 Jul 1998
Parents of children had falsely and negligently been accused of abusing their children. The children sought damages for negligence against the doctors or social workers who had made the statements supporting the actions taken. The House was asked if the suffering of psychiatric injury by the parent was a foreseeable result of making it and … Continue reading JD v East Berkshire Community Health NHS Trust and others: HL 21 Apr 2005
The respondent company had asserted that the local authority had made a determination of the issue of whether electricity could be generated on a waste treatment site without further planning permission. The council said that without a formal planning application, no determination had been made. Held: The procedure of making a determination had important consequences. … Continue reading Regina (Reprotech (Pebsham) Ltd) v East Sussex County Council Reprotech (Pebsham) Ltd v Same: HL 28 Feb 2002
A school board employed staff to manage a residential school for vulnerable children. The staff committed sexual abuse of the children. The school denied vicarious liability for the acts of the teachers. Held: ‘Vicarious liability is legal responsibility imposed on an employer, although he is himself free from blame, for a tort committed by his … Continue reading Lister and Others v Hesley Hall Ltd: HL 3 May 2001
HL Income Tax – Incorrect return – Amount of penalty – Income Tax Act, 1952 (15 and 16 Geo. VI and 1 Eliz. II, c. 10), Section 25 (3).A court’s search for parliamentary intention is not an enquiry as to what the executive sought to achieve in drafting the Bill, but is ascertained from the … Continue reading Inland Revenue v Hinchy: HL 18 Feb 1960
The appellant convicted of a racially-aggravated vicious murder. Since conviction he had spent almost five years in segregation from other prisoners. The appellant now alleged that some very substantial periods of segregation had been in breach of the prison rules and of his Human Rights. Time limits for authorisation had not been complied with. Held: … Continue reading Shahid v Scottish Ministers (Scotland): SC 14 Oct 2015
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
The applicant sought to challenge the 2004 Hunting Act, saying that it had been passed under the provisions of the 1949 Parliament Act which was itself an unlawful extension of the powers given by the 1911 Parliament Act to allow the House of Commons to bring into law an Act which had not been approved … Continue reading Jackson and others v Attorney General: HL 13 Oct 2005
Prison rules were ultra vires in so far as they provided for reading letters between prisoners and their legal advisers. Every citizen has a right of unimpeded access to the court. A prisoner’s unimpeded access to a solicitor for the purpose of receiving advice and assistance in connection with a possible institution of proceedings in … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State Home Department, ex parte Leech (No 2): CA 20 May 1993
(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
Land-owner’s Possible Duty to Trespassers The plaintiff, a child had gone through a fence onto the railway line, and been badly injured. The Board knew of the broken fence, but argued that they owed no duty to a trespasser. Held: Whilst a land-owner owes no general duty of care to a trespasser, the creation by … Continue reading British Railways Board v Herrington: HL 16 Feb 1972
The claimant sought damages against the police, and wanted to bring in evidence of previous misconduct by the officers on a similar fact basis. They had been imprisoned and held for several years based upon admissions which they said they had obtained by improper pressure. Held: Evidence in civil cases is dealt with in two … Continue reading O’Brien v Chief Constable of South Wales Police: HL 28 Apr 2005
The claimant sought damages for malicious prosecution, and sought to adduce similar fact evidence. The defendant appealed an order admitting the evidence. Held: Comparisons between admission of similar fact evidence in civil and criminal proceedings were made. In general, the greater the putative force of the evidence the less ready a court should be to … Continue reading O’Brien v Chief Constable of the South Wales Police: CA 23 Jul 2003
The prosecutor had lead and relied at trial on evidence obtained by compulsory questioning under the 1986 Act. Held: In doing so the prosecutor was acting to give effect to section 433. The decision in Lambert to disallow retrospective effect of Human Rights decisions in appeal cases may have been incorrect, but will be followed. … Continue reading Regina v Kansal (2): HL 29 Nov 2001
Plea of Autrefois Acquit is Narrow in Scope The defendant had been tried for and acquitted of murder. The prosecution then sought to have him tried for robbery out of the same alleged facts. The House considered his plea of autrefois convict. Held: The majority identified a narrow principle of autrefois, applicable only where the … Continue reading Connelly v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 1964
A student had been failed after being falsely accused of cheating, but the academic review board, on remarking the paper marked it as zero. Held: Where a University did not have the supervisory jurisdiction of a visitor, a breach of contract by the University was judiciable by the courts. They had not properly marked the … Continue reading Clark v University of Lincolnshire and Humberside: CA 14 Apr 2000
The claimant alleged malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office against the defendant. He had been charged with perverting the course of justice. He had worked for a firm of solicitors specialising in defending road traffic prosecutions. A client and family members had been convicted of giving false evidence, after, following acquittal, material was disclosed … Continue reading Howarth v Gwent Constabulary and Another: QBD 1 Nov 2011
Remission of Sentence is a Privilege not a Right The plaintiffs had begun their action, to challenge their loss of remission as prisoners, by means of a writ, rather than by an action for judicial review, and so had sidestepped the requirement for the action to be brought within strict time limits. Held: The forfeiture … Continue reading O’Reilly v Mackman: HL 1982
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
The Home Office can be liable for the actions of prison officers which amounted to an official misfeasance. The principles of vicarious liability apply as much to misfeasance in public office as to other torts involving malice, knowledge or intention. Lord Jauncey said: ‘My Lords, in my view, striking out paragraph 6 of this claim … Continue reading Racz v Home Office: HL 17 Dec 1993
The respondent was convicted of sexual offences against two groups of boys. The trial judge directed the jury that they would be entitled to take into account the uncorroborated evidence of the second group as supporting evidence given by the first group. Held: The House considered what was the general character of relevant evidence. Lord … Continue reading Regina v Kilbourne: HL 1973
In each case the prisoners challenged their transfer to cellular confinement or segregation within prison or YOI, saying that the transfers infringed their rights under Article 6, saying that domestic law, either in itself or in conjunction with recent decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, acknowledged that serving prisoners have a right to … Continue reading King, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: CA 27 Mar 2012
Chilling effect of defamation costs structures Eady J said: ‘The claimant in these proceedings is seeking damages against News Group Newspapers Ltd, as publishers of The News of the World, in respect of articles appearing in the editions of that newspaper dated 3 November 2002 . . He issued his claim form under an assumed … Continue reading Turcu v News Group Newspapers Ltd: QBD 4 May 2005
Golden Thread of British Justice – Proof of Intent The appellant had been convicted of the murder of his wife. She had left him and returned to live with her mother. He went to the house. He said he intended to frighten her that he would kill himself if she did not return. He wired … Continue reading Woolmington v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 23 May 1935
Specific Intention as to Damage Caused (Court of Criminal Appeal) The defendant wrenched a gas meter from the wall to steal it. Gas escaped. He was charged with unlawfully and maliciously causing a noxious thing, namely coal gas, to be taken by the victim. Held: Byrne J said: ‘We have considered those cases R v … Continue reading Regina v Cunningham: CCA 1957
The defendant appealed against his sentence to a term of imprisonment for public protection on his admission of wounding with intent. The sentencing system applied was replaced on the day following sentencing, and he said that the court should have applied the principle of lex mitior. Held: The appeal failed: ‘there was no fault in … Continue reading Docherty, Regina v: CACD 18 Jun 2014
The claimant was taken into prison. He was known to be subject to epilepsy, with high risks on withdrawal from drugs, but was allocated a high bunk. He had a seizure and fell, suffering head injuries. He sought damages in negligence. The defendant appealed a preliminary finding that the prison service had broken a duty … Continue reading St George v The Home Office: CA 8 Oct 2008
In a case where a contemnor not only fails wilfully and contumaciously to comply with an order of the court but makes it clear that he will continue to defy the court’s authority if the order should be affirmed on appeal, the court must have a . .
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 . .
The House considered the principle that the confession of a defendant is inadmissible in a joint criminal case against a co-defendant. In a trial for murder, one party was accused of requesting a middleman to arrange for the murder by a third party. . .
Two defendants accused of murder each sought to place blame for the victim’s death on the other. One sought to rely upon the other’s record of violence as evidence of his co-accused’s propensity to violence.
Held: The record was admissible. By . .
The defendant had made misrepresentations, inducing the claimant to enter into share transactions which he would not otherwise have entered into, and which lost money.
Held: A deceitful wrongdoer is properly liable for all actual damage . .
Under s 3 of the 1962 Act and paras 1 and 10 of Sch 1, a Commonwealth citizen to whom the Act applied landing in the United Kingdom from a ‘ship’ (as widely defined) or an aircraft could within 24 hours of his landing be required by an immigration . .
The parties agreed that damages were payable in an action for restitution, but the sum depended upon to a calculation of interest. They disputed whether such interest should be calculated on a simple or compound basis. The company sought compound . .
The claimants sought a declaration. Planning permission had been confirmed for four mineral extraction sites by letter in 1952. In 1996, two were listed as now being dormant. The claimant said the letter of 1952 created on single planning permision . .
The defendants appealed their sentences for importation of class A drugs. They had acted as drugs mules. New guidelines were due to take effect which be expected to have led to shorter sentences. The court was asked whether such new standards could . .
The court considered a claim for judicial review of a police officer’s decision to turn back a number of coaches. Each coach contained passengers en route to join a demonstration at an RAF base in Gloucestershire, the officer honestly and reasonably . .