Click the case name for better results:

Director of Public Prosecutions v Gomez: HL 3 Dec 1992

The defendant worked as a shop assistant. He had persuaded the manager to accept in payment for goods, two cheques which he knew to be stolen. The CA had decided that since the ownership of the goods was transferred on the sale, no appropriation of property belonging to another had taken place. Held: An appropriation … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Gomez: HL 3 Dec 1992

Jetivia Sa and Another v Bilta (UK) Ltd and Others: SC 22 Apr 2015

The liquidators of Bilta had brought proceedings against former directors and the appellant alleging that they were party to an unlawful means conspiracy which had damaged the company by engaging in a carousel fraud with carbon credits. On the pleaded facts, Mr Chopra and Mr Nazir were the directing organ of Bilta under its constitution. … Continue reading Jetivia Sa and Another v Bilta (UK) Ltd and Others: SC 22 Apr 2015

Dubai Aluminium Company Limited v Salaam and Others: HL 5 Dec 2002

Partners Liable for Dishonest Act of Solicitor A solicitor had been alleged to have acted dishonestly, having assisted in a fraudulent breach of trust by drafting certain documents. Contributions to the damages were sought from his partners. Held: The acts complained of were so close to the activities which a solicitor would normally undertake, that … Continue reading Dubai Aluminium Company Limited v Salaam and Others: HL 5 Dec 2002

Lawrence v Metropolitan Police Commissioner: HL 30 Jun 1971

The defendant, a taxi driver, had without objection on the part of an Italian student asked for a fare of andpound;6 for a journey for which the correct lawful fare was 10s 6d. The taxi driver was convicted of theft. On appeal the main contention was that the student had consented to pay the fare. … Continue reading Lawrence v Metropolitan Police Commissioner: HL 30 Jun 1971

Rai, Regina v: CACD 29 Oct 1999

The deception required as an element of the offence of obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception, could be constituted by acquiescence, where there could properly be said to be a continuing representation, under which the person deceived had . .

AB and others v Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust: QBD 26 Mar 2004

Representative claims were made against the respondents, hospitals, pathologists etc with regard to the removal of organs from deceased children without the informed consent of the parents. They claimed under the tort of wrongful interference.