Click the case name for better results:

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

Baxter v Fear and Others: QBD 30 Oct 2015

Petitioned seeking a declaration that a local government election was invalid, on the basis of alleged acts and omissions perpetrated by the Returning Officer. Ballot papers had been misprinted with the wrong ward names. Wilkie, Jay JJ [2015] EWHC 3136 (QB) Bailii Representation of the People Act 1983 43 England and Wales Elections Updated: 12 … Continue reading Baxter v Fear and Others: QBD 30 Oct 2015

Erlam and Others v Rahman and Another: QBD 23 Apr 2015

The petitioners had alleged that the respondent, in his or his agent’s conduct of his campaign to be elected Mayor for Tower Hamlets in London in May 2014, had engaged in corrupt and illegal practices. Held: The election was set aside for corrupt practice. The general burden of proof both in respect of the charges … Continue reading Erlam and Others v Rahman and Another: QBD 23 Apr 2015

The Conservative and Unionist Party v The Election Commissioner and Others: Admn 19 Feb 2010

A local election result had been set aside for fraud in the winning Conservative candidate. The Commissioner made an order for costs against his party which was now challenged for lack of jurisdiction the Commissioner being functus officio, and the court was now asked to determine the extent to which someone who was not a … Continue reading The Conservative and Unionist Party v The Election Commissioner and Others: Admn 19 Feb 2010

Ullah and Others, Ahmed v Pagel, Scallan, Kennedy: CA 12 Dec 2002

The claimants sought to issue election petitions to challenge the results of local elections. The petitioners had complied with all the rules save that they had failed to serve the notice of presentation within the five day period. The claimants argued that the Civil Procedure Rules took sway over the Election Rules, and that the … Continue reading Ullah and Others, Ahmed v Pagel, Scallan, Kennedy: CA 12 Dec 2002

Regina v Rowe, ex parte Mainwaring and Others: CA 27 May 1992

Shortly before polling day in a local government election Liberal Democrat supporters printed and distributed in key wards a leaflet that made assertions about Labour policy. It was distributed in such a way as not to alert voters as to its true source, namely the Liberal Democrats. The losing Labour candidate issued a petition challenging … Continue reading Regina v Rowe, ex parte Mainwaring and Others: CA 27 May 1992

Ali v Bashir and Another: QBD 29 Jul 2013

Challenge to the election of the defendant as a councillor. Mr Ali alleged that Mr Bashir and his electoral ‘team’ had caused false names to be entered on the electoral register for the Ward. The names entered were those of either people who did not reside at the address stated or, in some cases, people … Continue reading Ali v Bashir and Another: QBD 29 Jul 2013

Erlam and Others v Rahman and Another: QBD 7 Aug 2014

Reasons for refusal of order for trial of cause under the 1983 Act to be held outside the constituency. The application was based upon allegations of electors being intimidated. Held: The application was dismissed: ‘The evidence, in my view, falls far short of establishing the special circumstances that would warrant moving the trial from the … Continue reading Erlam and Others v Rahman and Another: QBD 7 Aug 2014

Hirst v United Kingdom (2): ECHR 6 Oct 2005

(Grand Chamber) The applicant said that whilst a prisoner he had been banned from voting. The UK operated with minimal exceptions, a blanket ban on prisoners voting. Held: Voting is a right not a privilege. It was a right central in a democratic society. Though the right is not absolute, any limitation had to be … Continue reading Hirst v United Kingdom (2): ECHR 6 Oct 2005

Afzal, Regina (on the Application of) v Election Court and others: CA 26 May 2005

The appellant sought judicial review of the decision of the election court as to his conduct at an election to certify him guilty of corrupt and illegal practices. Held: The allegations against the appellants were so serious that though the proceedings were in their nature civil, evidence to a criminal standard was required. That was … Continue reading Afzal, Regina (on the Application of) v Election Court and others: CA 26 May 2005

Watkins v Woolas: QBD 5 Nov 2010

The petitioner said that in the course of the election campaign, the respondent Labour candidate had used illegal practices in the form of deliberately misleading and racially inflammatory material. Held: The claim succeeded, and the election result was set aside. The defendant had made several untrue statements relating to the character of the petitioner, fully … Continue reading Watkins v Woolas: QBD 5 Nov 2010

Moohan and Another v The Lord Advocate: SC 17 Dec 2014

The petitioners, convicted serving prisoners, had sought judicial review of the refusal to allow them to vote in the Scottish Referendum on Independence. The request had been refused in the Outer and Inner Houses. Held: (Kerr, Wilson JJSC dissenting) The ban did not infringe the prisoners’ human rights. The referendum was not an election to … Continue reading Moohan and Another v The Lord Advocate: SC 17 Dec 2014

Woolas, Regina (on The Application of) v The Speaker of The House of Commons: Admn 3 Dec 2010

The claimant sought to challenge the decision of an Election court setting aside his election as a Member of Parliament. The court was asked to decide whether it had jurisdiction to review a determination by the Election Court of a point of law, and if so whether that court had correctly decided as to the … Continue reading Woolas, Regina (on The Application of) v The Speaker of The House of Commons: Admn 3 Dec 2010

Tovey and Others v Ministry of Justice: QBD 18 Feb 2011

The claimants, serving prisoners, sought damages saying that the refusal to allow them to vote was in infringement of their human rights. The large numbers of claims had been consolidated in London. The claimant sought to withdraw his claim. Held: The claims failed and were struck out: ‘there are no reasonable grounds in domestic law … Continue reading Tovey and Others v Ministry of Justice: QBD 18 Feb 2011

Regina (Pearson Martinez and Hirst) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Others; Hirst v Attorney-General: QBD 17 Apr 2001

A law which removed a prisoner’s right to vote whilst in prison was not incompatible with his human rights. The implied right to vote under article 3 was not absolute, and states had a wide margin of appreciation as to how and to what extent the . .

Johnson v Gore Wood and Co: HL 14 Dec 2000

Shareholder May Sue for Additional Personal Losses A company brought a claim of negligence against its solicitors, and, after that claim was settled, the company’s owner brought a separate claim in respect of the same subject-matter. Held: It need not be an abuse of the court for a shareholder to seek damages against advisers to … Continue reading Johnson v Gore Wood and Co: HL 14 Dec 2000

Finucane, Re Application for Judicial Review: SC 27 Feb 2019

(Northern Ireland) The deceased solicitor was murdered in his home in 1989, allegedly by loyalists. They had never been identified, though collusion between security forces and a loyalist paramilitary was established. The ECHR and a judge led inquiry had said that a proper investigation was required. A promised inquiry under the 2005 Act was objected … Continue reading Finucane, Re Application for Judicial Review: SC 27 Feb 2019

Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation: CA 10 Nov 1947

Administrative Discretion to be Used Reasonably The applicant challenged the manner of decision making as to the conditions which had been attached to its licence to open the cinema on Sundays. It had not been allowed to admit children under 15 years of age. The statute provided no appeal procedure, and the applicant sought a … Continue reading Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation: CA 10 Nov 1947

Lipkin Gorman (a Firm) v Karpnale Ltd: HL 6 Jun 1991

The plaintiff firm of solicitors sought to recover money which had been stolen from them by a partner, and then gambled away with the defendant. He had purchased their gaming chips, and the plaintiff argued that these, being gambling debts, were worthless, and that therefore no consideration had been given. Held: The casino’s defence succeeded. … Continue reading Lipkin Gorman (a Firm) v Karpnale Ltd: HL 6 Jun 1991

Watkins v Home Office and others: HL 29 Mar 2006

The claimant complained of misfeasance in public office by the prisons for having opened and read protected correspondence whilst he was in prison. The respondent argued that he had suffered no loss. The judge had found that bad faith was established in three prison officers. In one case the officer opened the letter in front … Continue reading Watkins v Home Office and others: HL 29 Mar 2006

Austin and Another v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: HL 28 Jan 2009

Movement retsriction was not Liberty Deprivation The claimants had been present during a demonstration policed by the respondent. They appealed against dismissal of their claims for false imprisonment having been prevented from leaving Oxford Circus for over seven hours. The claimants appealed against rejection of their claims on human rights law. Held: The appeal failed. … Continue reading Austin and Another v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: HL 28 Jan 2009

Winterwerp v The Netherlands: ECHR 24 Oct 1979

A Dutch national detained in hospital complained that his detention had divested him of his capacity to administer his property, and thus there had been determination of his civil rights and obligations without the guarantee of a judicial procedure. Held: Article 5(1)(a) is concerned with the question whether the detention is permissible. Its object and … Continue reading Winterwerp v The Netherlands: ECHR 24 Oct 1979

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

Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 23 Mar 2011

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

Regina v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and another, ex parte European Roma Rights Centre and others: HL 9 Dec 2004

Extension oh Human Rights Beyond Borders The appellants complained that the system set up by the respondent where Home Office officers were placed in Prague airport to pre-vet applicants for asylum from Romania were dsicriminatory in that substantially more gypsies were refused entry than others, and that it was contrary to the obligations of the … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and another, ex parte European Roma Rights Centre and others: HL 9 Dec 2004

A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004

The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they did. A British subject, who was suspected in the exact same way, and there were … Continue reading A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004

In re B (Children) (Care Proceedings: Standard of Proof) (CAFCASS intervening): HL 11 Jun 2008

Balance of probabilities remains standard of proof There had been cross allegations of abuse within the family, and concerns by the authorities for the children. The judge had been unable to decide whether the child had been shown to be ‘likely to suffer significant harm’ as a consequence. Having found some evidence to suggest that … Continue reading In re B (Children) (Care Proceedings: Standard of Proof) (CAFCASS intervening): HL 11 Jun 2008

G, Regina (on The Application of) v X School and Others: CA 20 Jan 2010

The claimant was a teaching assistant. A complaint had been made that he had kissed a boy having work experience at the school, but it had been decided that no criminal prosecution would follow. He sought judicial review of the school’s decision to take disciplinary proceedings without allowing him legal representation. The school now appealed … Continue reading G, Regina (on The Application of) v X School and Others: CA 20 Jan 2010