Naylor v Preston Health Authority: CA 1987

The purposes of discovery include not only obtaining relevant evidence, but also reducing surprise and promoting fairness by putting parties in an equal position at trial, so that the parties are ‘playing with all the cards face up on the table’ the Master of the Rolls considered that there is ‘a duty of candour resting on the professional man’ and he concluded: ‘Accordingly the court has to have regard to all the circumstances although, in the nature of things, they are likely to be different in medical cases when contrasted, for example, with those involving barristers, solicitors, surveyors or accountants. The exercise of discretion has to be approached on the basis of the philosophy that the basic objective is always the achievement of true justice, which takes account of time, money and what can only be described as the anguish of uncertainty, as well as of a just outcome. It has to be exercised on the basis that the procedure of the courts must be, and is, intended to achieve the resolution of disputes by a variety of methods, of which a resolution by judgment is but one, and probably the least desirable. Accordingly anything which enables the parties to appreciate the true strength or weakness of their positions at the earliest possible moment and at the save time enables them to enter upon fully informed and realistic discussions designed to achieve a consensual resolution of dispute is very much in the public interest. ‘

Judges:

Sir John Donaldson MR

Citations:

[1987] 1 WLR 958, [1987] 2 All ER 353

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedO’Brien v Chief Constable of the South Wales Police CA 23-Jul-2003
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Evidence

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.186048

Steel v Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police: 10 Feb 1993

The plaintiffs sued three police officers for malicious prosecution. Specific discovery of documents relating to the previous misconduct of one of these officers was refused.
Held: Appeal allowed. Confessions were the only evidence against the plaintiffs, who had served their time afer convictions for robbery which were subsequently quashed. They said the confessions were fabricated. Their appeals were allowed after evidence that officers had improperly procured the conviction of other defendants in similar ways. To succeed the plaintiffs had to prove that prosecutions were unfounded. The officers’ state of mind was essential. Documents were sought to be discovered to provide evidence of similar facts in proof of the misconduct the prosecution. Evidence of the officers’ dishonesty went beyond discrediting him as a witness. They showed similar conduct in other cases. The judge refused specific discovery saying it was not similar fact evidence. The matters relied on were not concerned to rebut a defence of accident or coincidence. They did not show system, and they had no direct probative value in relation to the issue in the present case. They were merely attacks on credit, and the plaintiffs already possessed ample evidence for this purpose. The appeal was allowed. At discovery the court lookd to potential rather than actual admissibility. ‘In my view conduct of this kind is so contrary to the expected standard of behaviour of an investigating police officer that, if proved, it is capable of rendering it more probable that the plaintiffs’ alleged confession was not made and proving that D/Sgt Day had no sufficient belief in the grounds of and an improper motive for the prosecution of the plaintiffs.’ For the purpose of specific discovery, it was enough to show ‘sufficient similarity’ (as opposed to a ‘striking similarity’) between the other conduct and the conduct in the present action. He dismissed the ‘mere propensity’ argument in these terms: ‘I consider the significance of the misconduct alleged went beyond mere propensity. All similar fact evidence relating to misconduct on other occasions could be stigmatised as showing a propensity to behave in that fashion, but the allegations in the present case, if accepted, show that on other occasions D/Sgt Day was prepared to pervert the course of justice in a manner which made it more probable that he did so on the occasion in question.’

Judges:

Beldam, Dillon, and Roch LJJ

Citations:

Unreported, 10 February 1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Boardman HL 1974
The defendant appealed the admission of similar fact evidence against him. Acts of buggery were alleged by a schoolmaster with boys in which the accused was the passive partner.
Held: In order to be admissible similar facts must bear a . .
CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v P HL 1991
The defendant faced specimen counts of rape and incest against each of his two daughters. The trial judge refused an application for separate trials in respect of the offences alleged against each daughter. The defendant was convicted.
Held: . .

Cited by:

CitedO’Brien v Chief Constable of the South Wales Police CA 23-Jul-2003
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 . .
CitedO’Brien v Chief Constable of South Wales Police HL 28-Apr-2005
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Litigation Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.186051

Joy v Phillips Mills and Co Ltd: CA 1916

Circumstantial evidence of ‘the habits and ordinary doings’ may be admissible.
Phillimore LJ said: ‘Wherever an inquiry has to be made into the cause of the death of a person, and, there being no direct evidence, recourse must be had to circumstantial evidence, any evidence as to the habits and ordinary doings of the deceased which may contribute to the circumstances by throwing light upon the probable cause of death is admissible, even in the case of a prosecution for murder.’

Judges:

Phillimore LJ

Citations:

[1916] 1 KB 849

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedO’Brien v Chief Constable of the South Wales Police CA 23-Jul-2003
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.186050

Brown v Eastern and Midlands Railway Co: 1889

Citations:

(1889) 22 QBD 391

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedMood Music Publishing Co v De Wolfe Ltd CA 1976
The plaintiffs alleged breach of copyright case involving music and sought to have admitted in evidence similar fact evidence showing that the defendants had published music resembling material protected by copyright in the past. The defendant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.186043

Regina v Straffen: CCA 20 Aug 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 intended to control the admission of statements made to the police, not statements alsewhere. The statement was admissible. The defendant had denied the murder but in doing so had admitted the earlier murders. The general rules is not to admit such evidence. The similar fact evidence could be described as evidence of pure propensity to commit crimes similar to that with which he was charged.

Judges:

Slade, Devlin, Gorman JJ

Citations:

[1952] 2 QB 911

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedMakin v Attorney-General for New South Wales PC 12-Dec-1893
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 . .
CitedHarris v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1952
The House discussed the principle laid down in Makin’s case as to the admission of similar fact evidence.
Held: After approving the case, Lord Simon said: ‘It is, I think, an error to attempt to draw up a closed list of the sort of cases in . .
CitedPerkins v Jeffery 1915
Similar fact evidence might be admitted to help identify the defendant. . .
CitedThompson v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1918
The defendant was charged with gross indecency against boys. The defendant denied that he was the offender. Evidence was admitted that on arrest the defendant was in possession of powder puffs and that a search of his rooms uncovered indecent . .

Cited by:

CitedO’Brien v Chief Constable of the South Wales Police CA 23-Jul-2003
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 . .
CitedO’Brien v Chief Constable of South Wales Police HL 28-Apr-2005
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.186039

Berger v Raymond Sun Ltd: 1984

The court distinguished the test of the admissibility of evidence of similar facts from the criteria according to which the court should exercise its discretion to exclude such evidence. He said that the test of admissibility was the same in civil and in criminal cases.

Judges:

Warner J

Citations:

[1984] 1 WLR 625

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedSattin v National Union Bank Ltd CA 21-Feb-1978
The plaintiff sought damages from the loss of a diamond deposited with the defendant bank as security. He asked to present evidence about the experience of another customer who had lost jewellery he had deposited with it.
Held: The proposed . .
CitedMakin v Attorney-General for New South Wales PC 12-Dec-1893
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 . .

Cited by:

CitedO’Brien v Chief Constable of the South Wales Police CA 23-Jul-2003
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 . .
CitedThorpe v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police CA 1989
The plaintiff was arrested at a demonstration, charged with obstructing the highway and convicted before the magistrates. His conviction was quashed by the Crown Court on appeal. He sued for assault, unlawful arrest, false imprisonment and malicious . .
CitedO’Brien v Chief Constable of South Wales Police HL 28-Apr-2005
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.186047

Thorpe v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police: CA 1989

The plaintiff was arrested at a demonstration, charged with obstructing the highway and convicted before the magistrates. His conviction was quashed by the Crown Court on appeal. He sued for assault, unlawful arrest, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution. He sought discovery of documents showing any convictions of or adverse disciplinary findings against the police witnesses.
Held: He was not entitled to such discovery as the evidence would not be admissible.
Dillon LJ said: ‘I apprehend that Lord Denning MR [in Mood Music] was thinking of civil cases tried by a judge alone. Where there is a jury the court must be more careful about admitting evidence which is in truth merely prejudicial, than is necessary where there is a trial by a judge alone who is trained to distinguish between what is probative and what is not.’
Neill LJ said: ‘Evidence of ‘similar facts’ is relevant both in criminal and in civil cases to rebut defences such as accident or coincidence or sometimes to prove a system of conduct. Such evidence is not admissible, however, merely to show that the party concerned has a disposition to commit the conduct alleged.’

Judges:

Dillon, Neill, Mustill LJJ

Citations:

[1989] 1 WLR 665

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Boardman HL 1974
The defendant appealed the admission of similar fact evidence against him. Acts of buggery were alleged by a schoolmaster with boys in which the accused was the passive partner.
Held: In order to be admissible similar facts must bear a . .
CitedMood Music Publishing Co v De Wolfe Ltd CA 1976
The plaintiffs alleged breach of copyright case involving music and sought to have admitted in evidence similar fact evidence showing that the defendants had published music resembling material protected by copyright in the past. The defendant . .
CitedBerger v Raymond Sun Ltd 1984
The court distinguished the test of the admissibility of evidence of similar facts from the criteria according to which the court should exercise its discretion to exclude such evidence. He said that the test of admissibility was the same in civil . .

Cited by:

CitedO’Brien v Chief Constable of the South Wales Police CA 23-Jul-2003
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 . .
CitedO’Brien v Chief Constable of South Wales Police HL 28-Apr-2005
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 . .
CitedJP Morgan Chase Bank and others v Springwell Navigation Corporation ComC 14-Mar-2005
The defendants had invested money through the claimants, but had suffered severe losses. The claimants sought a declaration that they had no liability for such losses. The defendants counterclaimed that the claimants were liable in negligence, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.186049

Grobbelaar v Sun Newspapers Ltd: CA 9 Jul 1999

With the new Civil Procedure Rules, it was no longer correct that a court could not exclude evidence which was relevant, on the grounds that its probative value was outweighed by its prejudicial effect. The court now has full power and discretion to make such orders. ‘The just resolution of this case depends on the jury keeping their focus on match-fixing and not being distracted by matters that are insufficiently probative, given their potential for prejudice.’

Judges:

Potter LJ

Citations:

Times 12-Aug-1999

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 32

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed toGrobbelaar v News Group Newspapers and Another CA 18-Jan-2001
. .

Cited by:

Appeal fromGrobbelaar v News Group Newspapers and Another CA 18-Jan-2001
. .
CitedO’Brien v Chief Constable of the South Wales Police CA 23-Jul-2003
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 . .
See AlsoGrobbelaar v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another CA 18-Jan-2001
The claimant had been awarded andpound;85,000 damages in defamation after the defendant had wrongly accused him of cheating at football. The newspaper sought to appeal saying that the verdict was perverse and the defence of qualified privilege . .
See AlsoGrobbelaar v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another HL 24-Oct-2002
The claimant appealed against a decision of the Court of Appeal quashing the judgement in his favour for damages for defamation.
Held: The Court of Appeal was not able to quash a jury verdict as perverse, and the appeal succeeded. An appellate . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Evidence

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.186052

Sattin v National Union Bank Ltd: CA 21 Feb 1978

The plaintiff sought damages from the loss of a diamond deposited with the defendant bank as security. He asked to present evidence about the experience of another customer who had lost jewellery he had deposited with it.
Held: The proposed evidence was admissible. (Lawton LJ) If a defendant in this class of case said ‘My system for safeguarding customers’ property is a reasonably safe one’ it is relevant for the plaintiff to call evidence to show that experience should have taught the defendant that it was not a safe system. The evidence was also admissible in order to rebut the suggestion that the bank was unfortunate in losing the customer’s property albeit they used all reasonable care to safeguard it. ‘A fundamental principle of the law of evidence, both in civil and criminal cases, is that evidence must be confined to what is relevant. In general, if there is an issue whether A did a particular act on a particular day, then the fact that he may have done the same act on another day is not relevant to that issue. To that fundamental rule there are a number of exceptions.’ and ‘That principle of law [from Makin] in criminal cases applies equally in civil cases.’ (Megaw LJ) ‘There was a good deal of argument before us by counsel on each side: counsel for the plaintiff appellant seeking to show the similarities between matters arising in the present case and matters involved in the previous incident as to which it is sought to adduce evidence; counsel for the defendant respondent seeking to stress the differences between the two.
It is no objection to such evidence being tendered that it relates to one previous incident only. It does not need to be a defective ‘system’. It is no objection to the evidence being tendered that it is going to be contended on behalf of the defendant employer that the previous alleged incident did not happen at all, or that, if it did happen, there were material differences which would prevent it from having any substantial bearing upon the instant case: as, for example, where the claim by the employee is that he tripped over some piece of plant or some object left on the floor which ought not to have been there and evidence is given of another similar accident on a previous occasion, it would be no objection to the admissibility of the evidence if the case for the employer defendant was to be that, on the occasion of the previous incident, if (which he denies) it happened at all, there had been a sudden failure of the lighting system through no fault on the part of the employer. That would not affect the admissibility of the evidence though it might destroy all its weight.’

Judges:

Lawton LJ

Citations:

(1978) 122 SJ 367

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedMakin v Attorney-General for New South Wales PC 12-Dec-1893
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 . .

Cited by:

CitedBerger v Raymond Sun Ltd 1984
The court distinguished the test of the admissibility of evidence of similar facts from the criteria according to which the court should exercise its discretion to exclude such evidence. He said that the test of admissibility was the same in civil . .
CitedO’Brien v Chief Constable of the South Wales Police CA 23-Jul-2003
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 . .
CitedO’Brien v Chief Constable of South Wales Police HL 28-Apr-2005
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.186046

Moore v Ransome’s Dock Committee: 1898

Citations:

(1898) 14 TLR 539

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedMood Music Publishing Co v De Wolfe Ltd CA 1976
The plaintiffs alleged breach of copyright case involving music and sought to have admitted in evidence similar fact evidence showing that the defendants had published music resembling material protected by copyright in the past. The defendant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.186044

Rex v Smith: 1915

Citations:

(1915) 11 Cr App R 229

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedO’Brien v Chief Constable of the South Wales Police CA 23-Jul-2003
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Evidence

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.186040

Regina v Allan, Bunting and Boodhoo: CACD 6 Apr 2001

The authorities intercepted telephone conversations on card phones used by prisoners with people outside the prison. Was the intercepted material admissible? Was it a ‘communication in the course of its transmission . . by means of a public telecommunications system’ ? The lines came into the prison from the BT network. They ran to a control room in which there was a box which contained an isolator switch for each line. The isolator switch could be operated by prison officers to activate or deactivate each line. A recording device was attached to each line and all calls were automatically recorded as soon as a card phone handset was lifted from the rest position. The prisoner used a card to make a phone call.
Held: It was of central importance to determine whether the calls were being transmitted by a public telecommunication system at the time and place of interception. It was a private system at the point of interception, and the intercept was admissible.

Judges:

Keene LJ, Steel J and Sir Brian Smedley

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Crim 1025/6

Statutes:

Interception of Communications Act 1985 1(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Effik; Regina v Mitchell HL 22-Jul-1994
The material obtained by intercepting signals passing between a base unit and the handset of a cordless telephone was admissible because no communication was being made by means of a public system when the calls were intercepted by the police. A . .
CitedMorgans v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 18-Feb-2000
Without a warrant, the police had arranged for a call logger to retain details of the calls made, including the number called, time and duration. The dialing itself was a communication, which established a connection, through which further . .

Cited by:

CitedW, Regina v (Attorney General’s reference no 5 of 2002) CACD 12-Jun-2003
Three serving police officers provided confidential information to a known criminal. The Chief Constable authorised interception of telephones at a police station, a private network. The court accepted that section 17 prevented the defence asserting . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Prisons, Human Rights

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.183556

Ghulam Yasim v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 1996

The court rejected a submission that, in a civil claim, sections 76 to 78 PACE precluded reliance altogether upon any evidence by an interview undertaken without a prior caution. Those exclusionary provisions were confined, the Court made clear, to criminal proceedings. However: ‘1. Were the court to be satisfied that answers had been obtained by oppression, the weight to be accorded to evidence may nonetheless be reduced so that very little, if any weight could be accorded to it.
2. oppression requires the exercise of authority or power in a burdensome, harsh, or wrongful manner; unjust or cruel treatment of subjects, inferiors, etc, or the imposition of unreasonable or unjust burdens ‘in circumstances which almost always entail some impropriety by the interrogator’.

Citations:

[1996] EWCA Civ 707

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 76 77 878

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedPoonam v Secretary of State for The Home Department QBD 18-Jul-2013
The claimant sought damages, alleging: ‘oppressive questioning, unlawful arrest, unlawful detention, unlawful search of her home, theft and / or failure to secure her home premises, and the wrongful declaration by the UKBA that she was an illegal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.513549

Regina v Maqsud Ali: 1965

The court was asked whether tape recordings of speech were, in the law of evidence, documents.
Held: They were. Marshall J commented that: ‘For many years now photographs have been admissible in evidence on proof that they are relevant to the issues involved in the case and that the prints are taken from negatives that are untouched. The prints as seen represent situations that have been reproduced by means of mechanical and chemical devices. Evidence of things seen through telescopes or binoculars which otherwise could not be picked up by the naked eye have been admitted, and now there are devices for picking up, transmitting, and recording, conversations. We can see no difference in principle between a tape recording and a photograph. In saying this we must not be taken as saying that such recordings are admissible whatever the circumstances, but it does appear to this court wrong to deny to the law of evidence advantages to be gained by new techniques and new devices, provided the accuracy of the recording can be proved and the voices recorded properly identified; provided also that the evidence is relevant and otherwise admissible, we are satisfied that a tape recording is admissible in evidence. Such evidence should always be regarded with some caution and assessed in the light of all the circumstances of each case. There can be no question of laying down any exhaustive set of rules by which the admissibility of such evidence should be judged.’

Judges:

Marshall J

Citations:

[1966] 1 QB 688, [1965] 2 All ER 464

Evidence

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.464277

Evans v Getting: 1835

The manors of R and S the parishes of C and of Y, and the counties of Brecon were coterminous:
Held: that in an action for disturbance of common, in which the boundaries of the two manors came in question, a county history of the county of Brecon, which stated the boundaries of he counties at this spot, was not receivable in evidence.

Citations:

[1835] EngR 88, (1835) 6 Car and P 586, (1835) 172 ER 1376

Links:

Commonlii

Land, Evidence

Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.315596

George Wright v Sandford Tatham: 7 Jun 1838

On a question of the competence of a party to make a will, letters written to that party by person since deceased, and found (many years after their date) among his papers, are not admissible in evidence without proof that he himself acted upon them.

Citations:

[1838] EngR 710, (1838) 5 Cl and Fin 670, (1838) 7 ER 559

Links:

Commonlii

Citing:

See AlsoWright v Doe Dem Sandford Tatham KBD 13-Jun-1837
The court was asked as to the understanding of th edeceased when he made his will. Letters, found in the house, were produced and the court now asked whether they could be used in evidence.
Held: such letters were not admissible unless . .
See AlsoWright v Doe Dem Tatham HL 22-May-1838
In an issue on the sanity of a testator, who made his will in 1825, the devisee offered in evidence the following letters of deceased persons, which were found open, and addressed to testator, with other papers bearing his indorsements, in a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.312716

Bearmans Ltd v Metropolitan Police District Receiver: CA 1961

Sellers LJ said: ‘The second plaintiffs had paid some andpound;5,000 for that theft; and for their respective losses these plaintiffs sought to recover damages under the Riot (Damages) Act, 1886’
The court considered that a liberal approach was appropriate for the admissibility of hearsay evidence in civil proceedings.

Judges:

Sellers LJ, Devlin LJ

Citations:

[1961] 1 WLR 634, [1961] 1 All ER 384

Statutes:

Riot (Damages) Act 1886

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBedfordshire Police Authority v Constable and others ComC 20-Jun-2008
The authority insured its primary liability for compensation under the 1886 Act through the claimants and the excess of liability through re-insurers. The parties sought clarification from the court of the respective liabilities of the insurance . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Damages, Evidence

Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.270269

Regina v Governor of Brixton Prison and Another, Ex Parte Levin: QBD 11 Mar 1996

Extradition proceedings are criminal proceedings so as to allow the admission of computer printout under criminal procedures.

Citations:

Times 11-Mar-1996

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984$ 69

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromIn Re Levin; Regina v Governor of Brixton Prison, Ex parte Levin HL 10-Apr-1997
The applicant had been detained pending extradition to the United States on charges of fraud. He said the evidence would not have been sufficient to justify his committal for trial.
Held: The Francis case did not establish that the 1984 Act . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Extradition

Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.86727

Phillips v Symes: CA 2003

Courts should be reluctant to exclude altogether evidence merely because it is written. If the purpose of the order sought was to trace assets it would be wrong to permit cross-examination which was designed to show that there had been a contempt of court.

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1769

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoPhillips and Another v Robin James Symes and Robin Symes Ltd ChD 9-Jul-2001
English proceedings were issued to claim against a partnership. Simultaneously proceedings were issued in Greece, but the Greek proceedings were served on the London parties first. The plaintiffs in Greece asked the English court to issue a stay of . .

Cited by:

CitedPolanski v Conde Nast Publications Ltd HL 10-Feb-2005
The claimant wished to pursue his claim for defamation against the defendant, but was reluctant to return to the UK to give evidence, fearing arrest and extradition to the US. He appealed refusal of permission to be interviewed on video tape. Held . .
See AlsoPhillips, Harland (Administrators of the Estate of Michailidis), Papadimitriou; Symes (A Bankrupt), Robin Symes Limited (In Administrative Receivership), Domercq etc ChD 30-Jul-2004
Under the Ciivil Procedure Rules, experts have acquired greater responsibilities to the court. Those responsibilities transcend their perceived obligations to the parties whom they give evidence. . .
See AlsoPhillips, Harland (Suing As Administrators of the Estate of Christo Michailidis), Papadimitriou v Symes (A Bankrupt) Robin Symes Limited (In Administrative Receivership) Jean-Louis Domercq ChD 20-Oct-2004
Dr Z had given expert evidence in the principal proceedings. It was now said that that evidence had not been given in the proper way, and a remedy was now sought in costs.
Peter Smith J had held that: ‘It seems to me that in the administration . .
See AlsoPhillips, Harland (Suing As Administrators of the Estate of Christo Michailidis), Papadimitriou v Symes (A Bankrupt) Robin Symes Limited (In Administrative Receivership) Jean-Louis Domercq etc ChD 20-Oct-2004
. .
See AlsoSymes v Phillips and others CA 6-May-2005
. .
See AlsoSymes v Phillips and others CA 19-May-2005
The applicant was in contempt of court. He successfully appealed a sentence of two years imprisonment, with the sentence being reduced to one year. Legally aided, he sought his costs from the claimant. The claimant replied that their part was only . .
See AlsoPhillips, Harland (Suing As Administrators of the Estate of Christo Michailidis) v Symes (A Bankrupt), Nussberger, Galerie Nefer Ag, Geoff Rowley ChD 19-Aug-2005
The court allowed the appellant’s application to dispense with service of a claim form under the rule. The High Court became seised of the matter as at 19 January 2005. Further directions were given. . .
See AlsoPhillips and others v Symes and others ChD 12-Jul-2006
. .
CitedKensington International Ltd v Republic of Congo and Another ComC 20-Jul-2006
The claimant sought leave to cross examine an officer of the defendant in connection with his affidavit sworn in search order proceedings. The case had a history of deceit and dishonest oral evidence.
Held: Though such an order would be . .
See AlsoPhillips and Another v Symes and Others (No 6) CA 19-May-2006
Proceedings were issued in England for service on the defendant in Switzerland, but because of an error by the Swiss Court were not properly served. Proceedings were then issued in Sitzerland, and seisin was claimed for the Swiss Court. The claimant . .
See AlsoPhillips and others v Symes and others ChD 16-Oct-2006
. .
See AlsoPhillips and Another v Symes and others HL 23-Jan-2008
Various parties had sought relief in the English courts and in Switzerland after an alleged fraud. There had been a mistake in service of the proceedings in England. The high court had dispensed with service an backdated the effect of the order to . .
CitedHB v PB FD 9-Jul-2013
Claim for costs against third party local authority, Croydon LBC after four day private law fact finding hearing. F said that M had fabricated illnesses both in herself and the child leading to the LA being asked to prepare a report. That report . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.222700

Scott v Bridge and Others: ChD 25 Nov 2020

Claim to recover money and property said to have been transferred by the claimant to the defendants or one or more of them. The money concerned came from a bank account belonging to the claimant. The property concerned consisted of two dwelling-houses, one which the claimant had inherited from her parents, and in which she lived until recently, and one which was acquired by the first and second defendants under the social housing right to buy scheme. The claims are based variously on the doctrines of unjust enrichment, undue influence, resulting and constructive trusts, proprietary estoppel, and mistake.
Held: Although the claimant was entitled to judgment for the sum of pounds 89,500 on unjust enrichment principles, she was not entitled to a proprietary claim as against the third defendant’s bank account or its traceable proceeds.

Judges:

HHJ Paul Matthew

Citations:

[2020] EWHC 3116 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedWisniewski v Central Manchester Health Authority CA 1997
The court considered the effect of a party failing to bring evidence in support of its case, as regards the court drawing inferences: ‘(1) In certain circumstances a court may be entitled to draw adverse inferences from the absence or silence of a . .
CitedTownson v Tickell And Another 6-Nov-1819
A devisee in fee may by deed, without matter of record, disclaim the estate devised.
There is a presumption that, when a gift of property is made, the donee is presumed to accept it unless, upon learning of the gift, the recipient repudiates . .
CitedHoward v Fingall ChD 1853
Vice-Chancellor Stuart said: ‘In order to make a valid gift, there must be perfect knowledge in the mind of the person making the gift of the extent of the beneficial interest intended to be conferred, and of which it is intended to divest oneself . .
CitedStanding v Bowring CA 18-Dec-1885
The Plaintiff, a widow, in the year 1880, caused pounds 6000 Consols to be transferred into the joint names of herself and the Defendant, who was her godson. She did so with the express intention that the Defendant, in the event of his surviving . .
CitedCochrane v Moore CA 29-Apr-1890
Gift of Chattel to be Completed by Delivery
To create a gift, if it be a chattel capable of manual delivery the donor must deliver it to the donee by actually handing it over, or else do some act which in the eye of the law amounts to delivery of possession, as for example handing over some . .
CitedDewar v Dewar ChD 1975
The court was asked whether a payment of pounds 500 by their mother to one of two brothers who were the litigants was to be treated as a gift or as a loan. The evidence showed that the mother always intended it to be a gift, that the son wanted to . .
CitedMeisels v Lichtman and Another QBD 9-Apr-2008
The court considered gifts to charity: ‘Where there is a dispute it seems to me that it is the intentions of the donor nor that will be crucial, rather than the more familiar exercise of ascertaining the intentions of both parties in construing the . .
CitedIn re Diplock CA 1948
S 26 of the Act of 1939 would operate to postpone the running of time in the case of an action at common law to recover money paid under a mistake of fact, and would likewise apply to an analogous claim in equity to recover money paid under a . .
CitedFoskett v McKeown and Others HL 18-May-2000
A property developer using monies which he held on trust to carry out a development instead had mixed those monies with his own in his bank account, and subsequently used those mixed monies to pay premiums on a life assurance policy on his own life, . .
CitedBank of Cyprus UK Ltd v Menelaou SC 4-Nov-2015
The bank customers, now appellants, redeemed a mortgage over their property, and the property was transferred to family members, who in turn borrowed from the same lender. A bank employee simply changed the name on the mortgage. This was ineffective . .
CitedWestdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v Islington London Borough Council HL 22-May-1996
Simple interest only on rate swap damages
The bank had paid money to the local authority under a contract which turned out to be ultra vires and void. The question was whether, in addition to ordering the repayment of the money to the bank on unjust enrichment principles, the court could . .
PreferredShalson and others v Russo and others ChD 11-Jul-2003
Rimer J doubted obiter comments of Lord Brown-Wilkinson: ‘I do not find that an easy passage. As to the first paragraph, a thief ordinarily acquires no property in what he steals and cannot give a title to it even to a good faith purchaser: both the . .
CitedThe Prudential Assurance Company Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 19-Apr-2016
The issues on this appeal all relate to what have been called ‘portfolio holdings’; that is to say dividends paid on shares in foreign companies held as investments, where the investor holds less than 10 per cent of the voting power in the company . .
MentiuonedSinclair Investments (UK) Ltd v Versailles Trade Finance Ltd and Others CA 29-Mar-2011
The appellant challenged a decision that it was not entitled to a proprietary interest in the proceeds of sale of some shares which had been acquired with the proceeds of a breach of trust. Specifically, the claims gave rise to (i) an issue as to . .
CitedThe Trustee of the Property of FC Jones and Sons v Jones CA 25-Apr-1996
Statute may cause the legal ownership of the bank account to change, for example on bankruptcy of the account holder or holders . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Estoppel, Undue Influence, Evidence

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.656364

Regina v Rice: CCA 1963

The court considered the status in evidence of a used air ticket.
Held: Where the prosecution have available evidence to establish an essential part of the case for the prosecution, that evidence should be called as part of the case for the prosecution, and the prosecution should not, as a matter of proper practice, seek to supplement and complete the case for the prosecution by cross examination of the accused.
The court accepted into evidence an airline ticket displaying the name of the accused on the basis that its relevance and legal admissibility stemmed from the likelihood that a ticket with a name or names on it had been used on a flight by a person of that name or names on the ticket. The ticket could be used to infer that the accused had taken the flight to which the ticket applied. The court distinguished the relevance and probative significance of the ticket itself as opposed to its content.
A trial judge’s discretion must be exercised within the limits imposed by the case law and in such a way and subject to such safeguards as seem to the judge best suited to achieve justice between the Crown and the defendant.

Judges:

Winn J

Citations:

[1963] 1 QB 857, [1963] 1 All ER 832, (1963) 47 Cr App R 79, [1963] 2 WLR 585

Cited by:

CitedPershad, Regina v CACD 10-Apr-2014
The defendant appealed against his conviction for cheating the public revenue. He said that the prosection had been allowed to produce and use at trial evidence not previously disclosed. As a practicing barrister he had not paid his VAT for 12 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Evidence

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.524025

Rose v The King: 1947

(Quebec Court of King’s Bench) The court upheld the admission as evidence in a criminal case of documents taken by a witness from the Russian Embassy which evidenced a plot, to which Russian officials were party, against the Canadian State. The law recognised the general inviolability of mission documents, but the general principle was subject to an exception in the case of documents which put the safety of the state to which the mission was accredited in peril. In that event, if seized by the Canadian State, they lost ‘the privilege of immunity’.

Judges:

Bissonnette J

Citations:

[1947] 3 DLR 618

Commonwealth, Evidence

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.510852

Regina v Lee: 1998

(High Court of Australia) The court considered the operation of the hearsay rule, saying: ‘The rule’s operation requires consideration first of why it is sought to lead evidence of something said or done out of Court (a previous representation). What is it that that ‘previous representation’ is led to prove? In particular, is it sought to lead it to prove the existence of a fact that the person who made the representation intended to assert by it? The fact that the statement or the conduct concerned might unintendedly convey some assertion is not to the point. The inquiry is about what the person who made the representation intended to assert by it.’
Evidence that a witness had seen what was recorded in his prior statement was relevant to the issues in the case, but his representation out of court that he had seen those things was hearsay; however, because that representation was also relevant to show that he had made a prior statement inconsistent with his evidence in court, the hearsay rule did not apply; and so the representation would be admissible to prove the fact that the witness intended to assert by the representation.
‘Confrontation and the opportunity for cross-examination is of central significance to the common law adversarial system of trial.’

Judges:

Gleeson CJ, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne and Callinan JJ

Citations:

(1998) 195 CLR 594, (1998) 157 ALR 394, (1998) 16 Leg Rep C1

Cited by:

CitedAl Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others SC 13-Jul-2011
The claimant pursued a civil claim for damages, alleging complicity of the respondent in his torture whilst in the custody of foreign powers. The respondent sought that certain materials be available to the court alone and not to the claimant or the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Criminal Practice, Evidence

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.441865

Regina v Exall And Others: 1866

Pollock CB directed the jury: ‘It has been said that circumstantial evidence is to be considered as a chain, and each piece of evidence as a link in the chain, but that is not so, for then, if any one link broke, the chain would fall. It is more like the case of a rope composed of several cords. One strand of the cord might be insufficient to sustain the weight, but three stranded together may be quite of sufficient strength.’

Judges:

Pollock CB

Citations:

[1866] EngR 22, (1866) 4 F and F 922, (1866) 176 ER 850

Links:

Commonlii

Cited by:

CitedFortune and Others v Wiltshire Council and Another CA 20-Mar-2012
The court considered the contnuation of public rights of way against the new system of the ending of certain unrecorded rights.
Held: he appeal failed. ‘As a matter of plain language, section 67(2)(b) does not, in our judgment, require the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.280733

In re Bramblevale Ltd: 1970

For reasons of policy or pragmatism, the actual criminal standard of proof may be used in civil proceedings such as contempt of court. Contempt of court is a criminal offence. Accordingly, the burden of proving that the defendant is in contempt rests on the claimant and the facts constituting any contempt must be proved to the criminal standard.

Citations:

[1970] 1 Ch 128

Cited by:

CitedAN, Regina (on the Application of) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (Northern Region) and others CA 21-Dec-2005
The appellant was detained under section 37 of the 1983 Act as a mental patient with a restriction under section 41. He sought his release.
Held: The standard of proof in such applications remained the balance of probabilities, but that . .
CitedAirbus Operations Ltd v QBE Insurance Company (UK) Ltd and Another Admn 14-Dec-2012
The defendants sought to have the claimant committed for contempt, alleging that in exaggerating his symptoms, he had sought to inflate the amount of his damages claim.
Held: Contempt was found. Some of the allegations were found to have been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Contempt of Court

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.237708

Wright v Wright: 1948

The civil standard of proof is flexible and the court may properly require a higher degree of probability which is appropriate to what is at stake. ‘… the nature and gravity of an issue necessarily determines the manner of attaining reasonable satisfaction of the truth of the issue.’

Judges:

Dixon J

Citations:

(1948) 77 CLR 191

Cited by:

CitedKhera v Secretary of State for The Home Department; Khawaja v Secretary of State for The Home Department HL 10-Feb-1983
The appellant Khera’s father had obtained leave to settle in the UK. The appellant obtained leave to join him, but did not disclose that he had married. After his entry his wife in turn sought to join him. The appellant was detained as an illegal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Evidence

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.237707

Main v Andrew Wormald Ltd: 1988

A reclaiming motion challenged the entitlement of the medical witnesses in a case relating to asbestosis to rely on epidemiological literature.
Held: ‘In my opinion, the medical witnesses in this case were entitled to refer to medical literature, and in particular they were entitled to refer to published papers by epidemiologists even though they themselves were not epidemiologists. All the medical witnesses in this case were experts in chest disorders. They were there thus fully entitled to have regard to medical literature bearing upon that subject. Of course, where a medical witness has made reference to the published views of epidemiologists, it must be kept in mind that these views of epidemiologists have not been subjected to testing by cross examination.’ After referring to Abadom: ‘I am accordingly satisfied that the medical witnesses were entitled to refer to the views of epidemiologists, and to adopt their views. On the other hand, it must be borne in mind that the authors of the articles were not examined as witnesses and were not cross examined. Furthermore, as Lord President Cooper observed in Davie, except in so far as a witness had adopted a passage from a published work, the court cannot rely upon the published work for the purpose of displacing or criticising the witness’ testimony. Moreover, where a witness has adopted a particular passage from a published work, the court is entitled to determine whether the reasoning in the particular passage appears to be reasonable and convincing or not.’

Lord Dunpark: ‘The pursuers’ doctors’ evidence, based, it seems to me, primarily if not solely upon these epidemiological studies, was that the greater the exposure to asbestos dust inhalation, the greater the risk of contracting lung cancer; but that does not answer the crucial question, namely, whether asbestos exposure per se is a likely cause of lung cancer in the absence of any lung damage which could be associated with asbestos inhalation. Nevertheless, I am of opinion that the relationship between asbestos exposure and lung cancer was sufficiently within the field of the pursuers’ doctors to enable them professionally to refer to studies on this subject; but the real question is whether they drew the correct inference from them.’
Lord McDonald: ‘It is, in my opinion, clear that an expert witness may in the course of his evidence, make reference to passages from a published work and adopt these as part of his evidence […]. There are, however, limits to this practice. One is that the expert witness must first have testified specifically to his own direct experience in the field in question. Having done that he is entitled to supplement his evidence by reference to recognised published works […]. It is essential, however, that the introduction of the literature be preceded by firm evidence from the expert as to his personal experience in the specialist field concerned. If this is not so there is a real danger that the literature becomes the primary evidence and is given a status it should not acquire unless spoken to by a witness directly responsible for its contents.’

Judges:

The Lord Justice-Clerk (Lord Ross), Lord Dunpark, Lord McDonald

Citations:

1988 SLT 141

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

CitedMcTear v Imperial Tobacco Ltd OHCS 31-May-2005
The pursuer sought damages after her husband’s death from lung cancer. She said that the defenders were negligent in having continued to sell him cigarettes knowing that they would cause this.
Held: The action failed. The plaintiff had not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.226709

Gillie v Posho: 1939

The court discussed the rule that a witness’ statement outside court may be used against him but not generally to support the truth of his statement.

Citations:

[1939] 2 All ER 196

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Beedles CACD 31-Jul-1996
The defendant appealed against his conviction for sexual assault. The issue was whether a note written by the complainant to her teacher was admissible as evidence of recent complaint to corroborate her statement. Similar allegations had been made . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.225384

McGregor v D: 1977

With regard to proceedings under the 1968 Act, in no sense were these proceedings criminal proceedings. They were on the contrary civil proceedings sui generis. Where the ground of referral is that the child has committed an offence and the sheriff is asked to consider whether this ground has been established under section 68 of the 1995 Act, the standard of proof which must be applied is that which is required in criminal procedure: section 68(3)(b). The Civil Evidence (Scotland) Act 1988 provides for the abolition of corroboration and the admission of hearsay evidence in civil proceedings. But section 9 of that Act excepts from the definition of ‘civil proceedings’ for the purposes of that Act any hearing by a sheriff of an application under what is now Part II of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 where the ground of referral was that the child has committed an offence. Nevertheless, the proceedings which Parliament has laid down for the determination of these applications by the sheriff is civil procedure.

Judges:

Lord President Emslie

Citations:

1977 SC 330

Statutes:

Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968

Cited by:

CitedClingham (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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Evidence

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.224365

Regina v Sheppard: HL 1993

Where the prosecutor wishes to rely on evidence set out in a document produced by a computer, there must be affirmative evidence as to the computer’s reliability in accordance with the requirements of Section 69. It can be either oral evidence or a written statement tendered in accordance with paragraph 8 of Schedule 3 to the 1984 Act.

Citations:

[1993] AC 80

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 69

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Pilcher 1974
The prosecutor had closed his case, and the defendant had presented some evidence. It became clear that the prosecutor had failed to present evidence on one element, and the defendant appealed his conviction after the prosecutor had been allowed to . .

Cited by:

CitedChristopher James Jolly v Director of Public Prosections Admn 31-Mar-2000
At trial in the magistrates court, the prosecution had failed to bring evidence that the computer used to analyse the defendant’s breath alcohol was in proper working condition. The defendant submitted no case to answer, and the magistrates allowed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.195669

Barkway v South Wales Transport: HL 1950

The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur should not be used where the judge has presented to him alternate versions of the facts and his job is to decide between them.
Lord Radcliffe said that an event which in the ordinary course of things is more likely than not to have been caused by negligence is by itself evidence of negligence.
Lord Normand said: ‘the fact that an omnibus leaves the roadway and so causes injury to a passenger or to someone on the pavement is evidence relevant to infer that the injury was caused by the negligence of the owner, so that, if nothing more were proved, it would be a sufficient finding of liability against him.’
As to the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur: ‘The maxim is no more than a rule of evidence affecting onus. It is based on commonsense, and its purpose is to enable justice to be done when the facts bearing on causation and on the care exercised by the defendant are at the outset unknown to the plaintiff and are or ought to be within the knowledge of the defendant.’

Judges:

Lord Porter, Lord Radcliffe, Lord Normand

Citations:

[1950] AC 185, [1950] 1 All ER 392, [1950] WN 95

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromBarkway v South Wales Transport CA 1949
A bus had left the road and crashed as a result of a tyre burst. In stating how the defendant could discharge the onus of proof the Lord Justice said: ‘To displace the presumption [of negligence] the defendants must . . prove (or it must emerge from . .

Cited by:

CitedSmith and Another v Harris PC 30-Oct-2006
(Cayman Islands) The respondent appealed a finding of negligence. She drove a car along a road colliding with three pedestrians, the claimants. The pedestrians said they had been walking in single file in a lay-by off the main carriageway. The . .
CitedSmith v Fordyce and Another CA 10-Apr-2013
The claimant appealed against rejection of his claim for personal injuries from a road accident. The respondent driver had crashed into a wall. The claimant had been his front seat passenger. The judge had found the respndent not to be at fault, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Evidence

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.188791

Kitcat v Sharp: 1882

The plaintiff clergyman had begun his action for rescission of a contract with the defendant for misrepresentattion. The defendant sent him a ‘private and confidential’ letter threatening publication of the pleadings with comments depreciating the plaintiff. The plaintiff had previously refused to enter into further direct communication with the defendant.
Held: The defendant could not, by a marking of the letter, impose on the plaintiff any condition as to its use. The letter was admissible, containing ‘a threat if an offer is not accepted’.
A superior court which has power to punish contempts, and power to issue injunctions, may also grant an injunction to restrain a threatened contempt In granting such an injunction, Fry J said: ‘There are three different sorts of contempt. One is scandalizing the Court itself. There may be likewise contempt of Court in abusing parties who are concerned in causes here. There may be also a contempt of this Court in prejudicing mankind against persons before the cause is heard. ‘ and
‘It appears to me I have plainly jurisdiction to prevent the threatened conduct. Only observe what would be the effect if I had not the jurisdiction. It would be that the Court, seeing that a fair trial is likely to be interfered with by a contempt of Court, would be powerless to prevent such contempt, and powerless to prevent the fair trial from being interfered with.’

Judges:

Fry J

Citations:

(1882) 48 LT 64, (1882) 52 LJ CH 134, [1882] 31 WR 227

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedSavings and Investment Bank Ltd (In Liquidation) v Fincken CA 14-Nov-2003
Parties to litigation had made without prejudice disclosures. One party sought to give evidence contradicting the dsclosure, and the other now applied for leave to amend based upon the without prejudice statements to be admitted to demonstrate the . .
CitedRush and Tomkins Ltd v Greater London Council HL 3-Nov-1988
The parties had entered into contracts for the construction of dwellings. The contractors sought payment. The council alleged shortcomings in the works. The principal parties had settled the dispute, but a sub-contractor now sought disclosure of the . .
CitedHubbard v Woodfield 1913
. .
CitedRe William Thomas Shipping Co, Dillon (HW) and Sons Ltd v The Company, Re Thomas (Sir Robert) 1930
. .
CitedAlterskye v Scott 1948
The obligation of confidentiality for documents disclosed during litigation discovery includes a duty being: ‘the implied undertaking, under which a party obtaining discovery is, not to use documents for any collateral or ulterior purpose.’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Evidence, Contempt of Court

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.188465

Hales v Kerr: 1908

The court heard evidence that individuals other than the plaintiff had contracted infectious diseases after being shaven by a barber who had a practice of using razors and appliances that were dirty and unsanitary.
Channell J said: ‘It is not legitimate to charge a man with an act of negligence on a day in October and to ask a jury to infer that he was negligent on every day in September . . But when the issue is that the defendant pursues a course of conduct which is dangerous to his neighbours, it is legitimate to show that his conduct has been a source of danger on other occasions, and it is a legitimate inference that, having caused injury on those occasions, it has caused injury in the plaintiff’s case also . .’

Judges:

Channell J

Citations:

[1908] 2 KB 601

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedMood Music Publishing Co v De Wolfe Ltd CA 1976
The plaintiffs alleged breach of copyright case involving music and sought to have admitted in evidence similar fact evidence showing that the defendants had published music resembling material protected by copyright in the past. The defendant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.186045

Kirkup v British Rail Engineering Ltd: CA 1983

Where interrogatories are administered they should be drafted with considerable rigour because if they are so widely drawn as to be vague they may be regarded as oppressive.

Citations:

[1983] 1 WLR 1165, [1983] 3 All ER 147

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBranson v Snowden; Branson v Gtech UK Corporation (a Body Corporate) and Rendine CA 3-Jul-1997
The respective parties had been preparing competing bids for the National Lottery. One (Branson) alleged that the other had offerered a bribe. The other responded that the allegation was a lie, and each sued the other for defamation.
Held: The . .
CitedO’Brien v Chief Constable of the South Wales Police CA 23-Jul-2003
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Evidence

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.185964

Brown v Hawkes: CA 1891

The court considered the issue of malice as an element of malicious prosecution. It is a matter to be proved by the plaintiff or the case may be withdrawn, but in a proper case it may be inferred from want of reasonable and probable cause although the converse is not true.
Kay LJ said: ‘As I understand the argument for the plaintiff, it was said that the evidence to prove malice was that the defendant did not make proper inquiry as to the facts of the case. If that is all, and if that evidence is sufficient, the result would be that the finding on the first question put to the jury, that the defendant did not take proper care to inquire into the facts of the case, would, without more, determine the action in favour of the plaintiff. That cannot be so . .’

Judges:

Kay LJ

Citations:

[1891] 1 QB 718

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedGibbs and others v Rea PC 29-Jan-1998
(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 . .
CitedSinclair v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire and British Telecommunications Plc CA 12-Dec-2000
The claimant had been prosecuted, but the charge was dismissed as an abuse of process. He now appealed a strike out of his civil claim for damages for malicious prosecution.
Held: The appeal failed. The decision to dismiss the criminal charge . .
CitedBT v Crown Prosecution Service CA 16-Dec-1997
The plaintiff appealed against dismissal of his claim for malicious prosecution brought against the Service.
Held: Actions for malicious prosecution, against the Crown Prosecution Service are to be examined closely to ensure that they are not . .
CitedWilliamson v The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago PC 3-Sep-2014
(Trinidad and Tobago) The claimant had been held after arrest on suspicion of theft. He was held for several months before the case was dismissed, the posecution having made no apparent attempt to further the prosecution. He appealed against refusal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Torts – Other

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.184698

Regina v Goddard: 1896

The court admitted a statement made by a prisoner in custody to a constable who had cross-examined him.

Judges:

Cave, J

Citations:

(1896) 60 JP 491

Citing:

CompareRegina v Male 1893
The court rejected a statement made by a prisoner in custody to a constable who had cross-examined him, saying merely that the police have no right to manufacture evidence. . .

Cited by:

CitedIbrahim v The King PC 6-Mar-1914
(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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Evidence

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.184194

Regina v Thompson: 1893

No statement by an accused is admissible in evidence against him unless it is shown by the prosecution to have been a voluntary statement, in the sense that it has not been obtained from him either by fear of prejudice or hope of advantage exercised or held out by a person in authority.

Citations:

(1893) 2 QB 12

Cited by:

CitedIbrahim v The King PC 6-Mar-1914
(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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.184180

Regina v Male: 1893

The court rejected a statement made by a prisoner in custody to a constable who had cross-examined him, saying merely that the police have no right to manufacture evidence.

Judges:

Cave, J

Citations:

(1893) 17 Cox 689

Cited by:

CitedIbrahim v The King PC 6-Mar-1914
(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 . .
CompareRegina v Goddard 1896
The court admitted a statement made by a prisoner in custody to a constable who had cross-examined him. . .
ExplainedRogers v Hawken QBD 1894
(Year unknown) In a case of the admissibility of questions put before arrest, the Divisional Court, (judges not prone to lean against a prisoner)
Held: The statement was admissible and observed that ‘R. v. Male must not be taken as laying down . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Evidence

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.184193

Subramaniam v Director of Public Prosecutions: PC 1956

(Malaysia) The defendant sought to advance a defence of duress under a section of the Penal Code of the Federated Malay States which provided that, with certain exceptions, ‘nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is compelled to do it by threats, which, at the time of doing it, reasonably cause the apprehension that instant death to that person will otherwise be the consequence.’ He sought to have admitted evidence of threats made.
Held: What was said to the defendant was admissible to show that the defendant had good reason to fear death or personal injury. Hearsay evidence was admissible as to the state of the defendant’s mind. The appeal was allowed because evidence relied on by the appellant to show that he had had a reasonable apprehension of instant death was wrongly excluded.
The Board recognised the distinction between adducing a statement as evidence of something expressly or impliedly asserted in the statement and simply as evidence that the statement was made: ‘Evidence of a statement made to a witness by a person who is not himself called as a witness may or may not be hearsay. It is hearsay and inadmissible when the object of the evidence is to establish the truth of what is contained in the statement. It is not hearsay and is admissible when it is proposed to establish by the evidence, not the truth of the statement, but the fact that it was made.’

Citations:

[1956] 1 WLR 965

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Safi (Ali Ahmed); Regina v Ghayur; Regina v Shah; Regina v Showaib; Regina v Mohammidy; Regina v Shohab; Regina v Ahmadi; Regina v Safi (Mahammad Nasir); Regina v Kazin CACD 6-Jun-2003
The defendants appealed convictions after rejection of their defence of duress. They had hijacked an aeroplane in Afghanistan, and surrendered eventually at Stansted. They said they were acting under duress, believing they had no other way of . .
CitedRegina v Hudson and Taylor CACD 17-Mar-1971
Two teenage girls committed perjury by failing to identify the defendant. When prosecuted they pleaded duress, on the basis that they had been warned by a group, including a man with a reputation for violence, that if they identified the defendant . .
CitedBradford and Bingley Plc v Rashid HL 12-Jul-2006
Disapplication of Without Prejudice Rules
The House was asked whether a letter sent during without prejudice negotiations which acknowledged a debt was admissible to restart the limitation period. An advice centre, acting for the borrower had written, in answer to a claim by the lender for . .
CitedRatten v The Queen PC 1-Jul-1971
Res Gestae to admit circumstances of complaint
(Victoria) Evidence had been admitted under the res gestae rule, that a woman making a telephone call was in a hysterical state.
Held: It was properly used. Where a statement is made either by the victim of an attack or by a bystander, which . .
CitedAthwal and Others, Regina v CACD 7-May-2009
The appellants challenged their conviction for murder and sentences. The victim was the young second wife of the first defendant. It was said that she had been unfaithful, and having been lured to India, had been murdered there. She had disappeared, . .
ApprovedRegina v Kearley HL 3-Jun-1992
Telephone calls which were made to the defendant’s phone asking for drugs, but made after the arrest of the defendant for supplying drugs were inadmissible as hearsay. They were adduced to prove, by implication, the fact that he, as an occupier of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Crime, Commonwealth

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.183354

Webb and Hay v The Queen: 30 Jun 1994

(Australia) Criminal Law – Jury – Impartiality – Murder trial – Juror giving flowers to victim’s mother – Whether juror or jury to be discharged Appropriate test – Reasonable apprehension of lack of impartiality or real danger of lack of impartiality.
Evidence – Criminal trial – Accomplice inculpating accused – Whether accomplice warning necessary – Nature of warning.
The test of whether a bias was found in a member of court because of personal links is whether such links give rise to a reasonable apprehension or suspicion on the part of a fair minded and informed member of the public that there might have been such a bias.
As to the test laid down in Gough: ‘In considering the merits of the test to be applied in a case where a juror is alleged to be biased, it is important to keep in mind that the appearance as well as the fact of impartiality is necessary to retain confidence in the administration of justice. Both the parties to the case and the general public must be satisfied that justice has not only been done but that it has been seen to be done. Of the various tests used to determine an allegation of bias, the reasonable apprehension test of bias is by far the most appropriate for protecting the appearance of impartiality. The test of ‘reasonable likelihood’ or ‘real danger’ of bias tends to emphasise the court’s view of the facts. In that context, the trial judge’s acceptance of explanations becomes of primary importance. Those two tests tend to place inadequate emphasis on the public perception of the irregular incident.
We do not think that it is possible to reconcile the decision in Gough with the decisions of this Court. In Gough, the House of Lords specifically rejected the reasonable suspicion test and the cases and judgments which had applied it in favour of a modified version of the reasonable likelihood test. In Watson, faced with the same conflict in the cases between the two tests, this Court preferred the reasonable suspicion or apprehension test. That test has been applied in this Court on no less than eight subsequent occasions. In the light of the decisions of this Court which hold that the reasonable apprehension or suspicion test is the correct test for determining a case of alleged bias against a judge, it is not possible to use the ‘real danger’ test as the general test for bias without rejecting the authority of those decisions.
‘Moreover, nothing in the two speeches in the House of Lords in Gough contains any new insight that makes us think that we should re-examine a principle and a line of cases to which this Court has consistently adhered for the last eighteen years. On the contrary, there is a strong reason why we should continue to prefer the reasoning in our own cases to that of the House of Lords. In Gough, the House of Lords rejected the need to take account of the public perception of an incident which raises an issue of bias except in the case of a pecuniary interest. Behind this reasoning is the assumption that public confidence in the administration of justice will be maintained because the public will accept the conclusions of the judge. But the premise on which the decisions in this Court are based is that public confidence in the administration of justice is more likely to be maintained if the Court adopts a test that reflects the reaction of the ordinary reasonable member of the public to the irregularity in question. References to the reasonable apprehension of the ‘lay observer’, the ‘fair-minded observer’, the ‘fair-minded, informed lay observer’, ‘fair-minded people’, the ‘reasonable or fair-minded observer’, the ‘parties or the public’, and the `reasonable person’ abound in the decisions of this Court and other courts in this country. They indicate that it is the court’s view of the public’s view, not the court’s own view, which is determinative. If public confidence in the administration of justice is to be maintained, the approach that is taken by fair-minded and informed members of the public cannot be ignored. Indeed, as Toohey J. pointed out in Vakauta (1989) 167 CLR. at p.585 in considering whether an allegation of bias on the part of a judge has been made out, the public perception of the judiciary is not advanced by attributing to a fair-minded member of the public a knowledge of the law and the judicial process which ordinary experience suggests is not the case. That does not mean that the trial judge’s opinions and findings are irrelevant. The fair-minded and informed observer would place great weight on the judge’s view of the facts. Indeed, in many cases the fair-minded observer would be bound to evaluate the incident in terms of the judge’s findings.’

Judges:

Mason CJ and McHugh J

Citations:

(1994) 181 CLR 41, (1994) 122 ALR 41, (1994) 68 ALJR 582

Links:

Austlii

Jurisdiction:

Australia

Citing:

CitedRegina v Gough (Robert) HL 1993
The defendant had been convicted of robbery. He appealed, saying that a member of the jury was a neighbour to his brother, and there was therefore a risk of bias. This was of particular significance as the defendant was charged with conspiracy with . .
CitedRegina v Prime CACD 1973
Widgery LCJ said: ‘It is important in all criminal cases that the judge should on the first occasion when the jury separate warn them not to talk about the case to anybody who is not one of their number.’ . .

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No 2) HL 15-Jan-1999
A petition was brought to request that a judgment of the House be set aside because the wife of one their lordships, Lord Hoffmann, was as an unpaid director of a subsidiary of Amnesty International which had in turn been involved in a campaign . .
CitedIn Re Medicaments and Related Classes of Goods (No 2); Director General of Fair Trading v Proprietary Association of Great Britain and Proprietary Articles Trade Association CA 21-Dec-2000
The claimants alleged that a connection between a member of the Restrictive Practices Court, who was to hear a complaint and another company, disclosed bias against them. She had not recused herself.
Held: When asking whether material . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Natural Justice, Evidence

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.183297

Regina v Spiby: 1990

The printout from a computerised machine was used to monitor telephone calls. It automatically recorded information such as the numbers to which the calls were made and the duration of the calls. This was admitted as real evidence. It was held that where information is recorded by mechanical means without the intervention of human mind the record made by the machine is admissible, and was not hearsay.

Citations:

(1990) 91 Cr App R 186 CA

Cited by:

DisapprovedRegina v Shephard HL 16-Dec-1992
The defendant had been convicted of theft from a supermarket. The evidence was that the till rolls did not include the goods the subject of the charge. She argued that it should not have been admitted as evidence, without supporting evidence that . .
CitedRegina (O) v Coventry Magistrates Court QBD 5-Apr-2004
The defendant was charged with incitement to distribute indecent images of children. He complained that the evidence relied upon were print-outs of pages on a web-site, being hearsay, and inadmissible as evidence not merely of the computer but of a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.183039

Richardson v Fisher: 5 Feb 1823

Citations:

130 ER 59, (1823) 1 Bing 145, [1823] EngR 355, (1823) 1 Bing 145, (1823) 130 ER 59 (A)

Links:

Commonlii

Cited by:

CitedLadd v Marshall CA 29-Nov-1954
Conditions for new evidence on appeal
At the trial, the wife of the appellant’s opponent said she had forgotten certain events. After the trial she began divorce proceedings, and informed the appellant that she now remembered. He sought either to appeal admitting fresh evidence, or for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Litigation Practice

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.182556

Hollington v E Hewthorn and Co Ltd: CA 1943

Decisions of an earlier tribunal were not binding or admissible in later proceedings where the earlier proceedings were before a court of criminal jurisdiction. Evidence of a prior conviction would not have been admissible in separate criminal proceedings to establish the truth of the underlying allegation. It was res inter alios acta.

Citations:

[1943] KB 587

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedThe Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Bairstow CA 11-Mar-2003
The Secretary of State attempted, in the course of director’s disqualification proceedings, to rely upon findings made against Mr Bairstow in an earlier wrongful dismissal action to which he had been a party but the Secretary of State not. The . .
CitedRegina v Hayter HL 3-Feb-2005
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. . .
CitedRegina v Hayter CACD 16-Apr-2003
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder, on the basis that the jury had used a conclusion about the guilt of a jointly accused to support his own conviction.
Held: Section 74 had altered the law, and earlier cases were no . .
CitedHi-Lite Electrical Ltd v Wolseley UK Ltd QBD 17-Jul-2009
The claimant sought a contribution from the defendant towards its liability for a fire at its premises, as found in earlier proceedings against the now claimant. The defendant had filed a defence merely not admitting, and not denying, responsibility . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Evidence

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.180961

Regina v Redpath: CCA 1962

Evidence as to the distress of a complainant may not carry probative weight if it is only part and parcel of the making of a complaint. However, it may properly be afforded weight if the complainant is unaware of being observed, and if the distress is exhibited at the time of, or shortly after, the offence itself, in circumstances which appear to implicate the accused.

Citations:

[1962] 47 Crim App R 319

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Venn CACD 1-Feb-2003
The defendant appealed convictions for sexual assault against four young girls.
Held: The admissibility of ‘similar fact’ evidence depends upon the degree of its relevance. If only suggests propensity it is inadmissible. If it goes further and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.181004

Regina v Minors, Regina v Harper: CACD 14 Dec 1988

In each case, the prosecution had produced a computer record to the court as evidence. The record was a computer print out. They challenged their convictions.
Held: To admit such evidence, the court had to see compliance with both sections. There should if necessary, be a trial within a trial first, to decide whether the document would generally be admissible under section 68, followed by a test of whether the specific provisions for computer data were also met.
cw Crime – Evidence – Documents, admissibility of – Computer print- outs – Computer records of stolen tickets and records of building society account – Procedure for admitting computer printouts in evidence – Whether printouts admissible in evidence

Judges:

Watkins L.J., Bush and Steyn JJ

Citations:

[1989] 1 WLR 441 CA

Links:

lip

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 68 69

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

ConsideredRegina v Ewing CA 1983
The admissibility of a handwriting comparison depended upon the control sample being ‘proved to the satisfaction of the judge to be genuine’.
Held: This meant that the judge had to apply the criminal standard of proof to the question. . .
CitedRegina v Bray CA 4-Jul-1988
. .
CitedRegina v Ewing CA 1983
The admissibility of a handwriting comparison depended upon the control sample being ‘proved to the satisfaction of the judge to be genuine’.
Held: This meant that the judge had to apply the criminal standard of proof to the question. . .
CitedRegina v Wood 1982
. .
CitedSophocleous v Ringer 1988
. .

Cited by:

DisapprovedRegina v Shephard HL 16-Dec-1992
The defendant had been convicted of theft from a supermarket. The evidence was that the till rolls did not include the goods the subject of the charge. She argued that it should not have been admitted as evidence, without supporting evidence that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Crime

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.177454

Environment Agency v M E Foley Contractors ltd and Another: QBD 18 Jan 2002

The defendant company did not accept that it had accepted special waste at its disposal plant. Instead they claimed to have the appropriate licence or exemption.
Held: The burden of establishing acceptance of special waste was not on the defendant ,on a balance of probabilities, but lay on the prosecution. In effect he was claiming the licence, and so the provisions of the 1980 Act did not transfer the burden of proof.

Judges:

Auld, Gage, LLJ

Citations:

Times 04-Mar-2002

Statutes:

Environmental Protection Act 1990 33(1)(a), Magistrates Courts Act 1980 101

Cited by:

CitedSkipaway Ltd v The Environment Agency Admn 5-May-2006
The defendant appealed convictions for breaches of its waste management licence, in that waste had been stored outside the edges of the storage bays. The defendant said that the material had not yet been stored, and that it had been deposited by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment, Evidence

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.167719

Director of Public Prosecutions v Andrew Earle Anthony Brown, Jose Teixeira: QBD 16 Nov 2001

Where a defendant to a charge of driving with excess alcohol, sought to test the accuracy of the Intoximeter, the Magistrates should consider whether the evidence was as to the particular Intoximeter used, and was of sufficient quality to displace the presumption in law that the Intoximeter system in general works. The evidence in such cases did not go to the ability of the equipment to measure the levels of alcohol in the deep lungs. Evidence that the machines might misread alcohol held in the mouth was not relevant since each defendant admitted that no such alcohol was present. Evidence should not be put before the Court as to whether the ECIR instrument should not have received the approval of the Secretary of State and/or that approval should have been revoked and/or that it had been modified

Judges:

Lord Justice Pill, Mr Justice Cresswell

Citations:

Times 03-Dec-2001, [2002] RTR 395, CO/3794/2001, CO/3710/2001

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988 5 15(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

ApprovedRegina v Skegness Magistrates’ Court ex parte Cardy 1985
Representations that the Intoximeter or other device used for measuring breath alcohol, should not have been approved or that the Secretary of State should have withdrawn approval in respect of the device should be addressed to the Secretary of . .

Cited by:

CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Memery QBD 4-Jul-2002
The Crown Court had concluded that the intoximeter EC/IR was not a validly approved device or if it was that it was unreasonable for the Secretary of State to have approved it since it was a device which detected mouth alcohol, i.e. was liable to . .
CitedGrant v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 22-Jan-2003
The appellant had been convicted of failing to give a breath test, and of driving with excess alcohol. He had falsely claimed that he had had a drink in the five minutes before being asked to take the test, and said the officer should not have . .
CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Wood; Director of Public Prosecutions v McGillicuddy Admn 19-Jan-2006
Each defendant sought disclosure of materials concerning the intoximeter instruments, having been charged with driving with excess alcohol. The defendants said that the meters were inaccurate and that the manufacturers were in effect part of the . .
CitedRose v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 11-Mar-2010
The defendant appealed by case stated his conviction of driving with excess alcohol. He said that the device used was not an approved one. He also said that the reading was invaid in including a reading of mouth alcohol. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Evidence

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.166814

National Association of Health Stores and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Department of Health: CA 22 Feb 2005

Applications were made to strike down regulations governing the use of the herbal product kava-kava.
Held: The omission of any transtitional provisions had not affected anyone. Nor was the failure to consult as to the possibility of dealing with the issue by use of a warning label fatal to the regulations. The Minister’s own personal ignorance of certain research did not invalidate the orders. The advice given to the minister had not been produced, and the parties were content to accept the accuracy of the description given of it, but ‘we would have required the briefing to be produced. The best evidence rule is not simply a handy tool in the litigator’s kit. It is a means by which the court tries to ensure that it is working on authentic materials. What a witness perfectly honestly makes of a document is frequently not what the court makes of it. In the absence of any public interest in non-disclosure, a policy of non-production becomes untenable if the state is allowed to waive it at will by tendering its own precis instead. ‘ Appeal dismissed

Judges:

Lord Justice Keene Lord Justice Sedley Mr Justice Bennett Lord Justice Keene Lord Justice Sedley Mr Justice Bennett

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 154, Times 09-Mar-2005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Medicines Act 1968, Food Safety Act 1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Hutchinson; Director of Public Prosecutions v Smith HL 12-Jul-1990
Protesters objected that byelaws which had been made to prevent access to common land, namely Greenham Common were invalid.
Held: The byelaws did prejudice the rights of common. The House was concerned to clarify the test applicable when . .
Appeal fromNational Association of Health Stores and Another v Secretary of State for Health and Another Admn 19-Dec-2003
. .
CitedRegina v Chief Constable of the Thames Valley Police, Ex parte Cotton CA 1990
The Chief Constable’s power to dispense with a probationer’s services under Condition 7 is only exercisable in cases where the probationer constable’s unfitness does not arise from alleged misconduct, for example where it arises from the constable’s . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Oladehinde HL 18-Oct-1990
A decision at Senior Executive Officer level was accepted as appropriate in a deportation case. There was an express form of delegation, and acts of the immigration officers required to be regarded as the acts of the Home Secretary.
Lord . .
CitedBushell v Secretary of State for the Environment HL 7-Feb-1980
Practical Realities of Planning Decisions
The House considered planning procedures adopted on the construction of two new stretches of motorway, and in particular as to whether the Secretary of State had acted unlawfully in refusing to allow objectors to the scheme to cross-examine the . .
CitedCarltona Ltd v Commissioners of Works CA 1943
Ministers May Act through Civil Servants
The plaintiffs owned a factory which was to be requisitioned. They sought a judicial review of the lawfulness of the order making the requisition, saying that the 1939 Regulations had been implemented not by the Minister as required, but by an . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for Education ex parte S QBD 21-Dec-1993
The Secretary of State is to disclose all advice on appeal against special needs assessment. . .
CitedTerence Geoffrey Best and others v Secretary of State for Environment v Bass Holdings Limited v South Somerset District Council v Tesco Stores Limited Admn 5-Mar-1997
Counsel for an objector in a planning case submitted that the contents of an incoming letter lying in the Department’s postroom were imputedly known to the Secretary of State.
Held: The judge generously described the submission as having an . .
CitedRegina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others HL 9-May-2001
Power to call in is administrative in nature
The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights . .
CitedAir 2000 v Secretary of State for Transport (No 2) OHCS 1990
Advice from the Civil Aviation Authority which by statute the Secretary of State was required to consider had been seen not by him but by an interdepartmental working party which advised him.
Held: Citing Carltona for the uncontroversial . .
CitedRegina v Home Secretary, ex parte Sherwin QBD 16-Feb-1996
The Benefits Agency was part of the Department of Social Security, having been set up under the prerogative power pursuant to the Prime Minister’s statement of 18 February 1988. . .
CitedMinister for Aboriginal Affairs and another v Peko-Wallsend Limited and others 1986
(High Court of Australia) The ground of failure to take into account a relevant consideration can only be made out if a decision-maker fails to take into account a consideration which he is bound to take into account in making that decision. If the . .

Cited by:

CitedJewish Rights Watch (T/A Jewish Human Rights Watch), Regina (on The Application of) v Leicester City Council Admn 28-Jun-2016
The claimant challenged the legaity of resolutions passed by three local authorities which were critical of the State of Israel. They said that the resolultions infringed the Public Sector Equality Duty under section 149 of the 2010 Act, and also . .
CitedGardner and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and Others Admn 27-Apr-2022
Patient transfer policy was unlawful
The claimants had relatives who died in care homes early in the COVID-19 pandemic. They said that the policy of moving patients from hospitals to care homes without testing had contributed to the deaths, and many others, and had been unlawful. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Consumer, Evidence

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.222864

Re AB (Child Abuse: Expert Witnesses): FD 1995

Citations:

[1995] 1 FLR 181

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

DisapprovedIn Re A (A Minor) (Disclosure of Medical Records to GMC) FD 21-Aug-1998
Applications by the General Medical Council for court records in order to pursue professional misconduct proceeding, should follow new routine of having two court hearings, ex parte appointment and on notice rather than previous three stages system. . .
CitedRe X (Non-Accidental Injury: Expert Evidence) FD 11-Apr-2001
A child had been injured, and the local authority sought a care order. An expert witness for the parents had argued that the child may have suffered a condition of Temporary Brittle Bone Disease (TBBD).
Held: Though the parents had been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Evidence

Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.180857

In re Y and K (Minors) (Split hearing: Evidence): CA 7 Apr 2003

In a ‘split trial’ procedure under the Act, it was wrong to bring in rules from criminal procedures. A witness who was competent was also compellable. Dicta in In re B were made without reference to section 98.

Judges:

Hale, Thorpe LJJ

Citations:

Times 18-Apr-2003

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 31 98

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Dicta correctedIn re B CA 2002
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Evidence

Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.180858

Regina v King’s Lynn Justices, Ex parte Holland: QBD 1993

Section 78 is properly applied in committal proceedings. Examining justices could exclude the evidence from their consideration only if satisfied that its admission at the trial would be so obviously unfair to the proceedings that no judge properly directing himself could admit it. Even in such a case it would generally be far better to leave the decision to the trial judge who will be in a better position to assess the effect on the fairness of the proceedings and have had greater experience of deciding such questions.

Citations:

[1993] 1 WLR 324

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1989 78

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedIn Re Levin; Regina v Governor of Brixton Prison, Ex parte Levin HL 10-Apr-1997
The applicant had been detained pending extradition to the United States on charges of fraud. He said the evidence would not have been sufficient to justify his committal for trial.
Held: The Francis case did not establish that the 1984 Act . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Evidence, Magistrates

Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.180865

Re R (A Minor) (Expert’s Evidence): FD 1991

The court gave guidance on the principles to be followed by experts providing evidence in children cases.

Citations:

[1991] 1 FLR 291

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRe X (Non-Accidental Injury: Expert Evidence) FD 11-Apr-2001
A child had been injured, and the local authority sought a care order. An expert witness for the parents had argued that the child may have suffered a condition of Temporary Brittle Bone Disease (TBBD).
Held: Though the parents had been . .
CitedA and D v B and E FD 13-Jun-2003
In two separate actions, fathers with parental responsibility sought orders requiring the mothers of their children to ensure they received the MMR vaccine. Each mother objected, having suspicions as to the safety of the treatment. Specific issue . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Evidence

Updated: 27 April 2022; Ref: scu.180856

Graigola Merthyr Co Ltd v Swansea Corporation: 1926

In cases involving expert evidence only two experts are to be heard on each side, unless the judge is satisfied that by reason of special circumstances justice cannot be done without hearing further expert evidence. This rule does not exclude either side from calling anyone to speak to matters he has seen, even though an expert, but in such cases the examination must be confined to matters of fact, and such person must not be treated as an expert witness.
‘Preventing justice excelleth punishing justice’

Judges:

Tomlin J

Citations:

(1926) 71 Sol Jo 142

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

First ProceedingsGraigola Merthyr Co Ltd v Swansea Corporation (No 2) 1928
The plaintiffs owned two collieries, worked as one. The defendant owned an adjacent reservoir, constructed in pursuance of a special Act, incorporating sections from the Waterworks Clauses Act 1847. Wanting to take their seams under the reservoir, . .
Earlier proceedingsGraigola Merthyr Co Ltd v Swansea Corporation CA 1928
The plaintiff mine-owner having had a contract that the neighbouring land owner would not refill its reservoir which would result in its workings being flooded, and that contract having expired, now sought an injunction to prevent the reservoir from . .
Earlier ProceedingsGraigola Merthyr Co Ltd v Swansea Corporation HL 1929
The Act of 1893 provided that a successful defendant should be entitled to costs as between solicitor and client in an action in respect of ‘any act done in the pursuance, or execution, or intended execution of any Act of Parliament or of any public . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Evidence

Updated: 25 April 2022; Ref: scu.619994

Chartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd and Others: HL 1 Jul 2009

Mutual Knowledge admissible to construe contract

The parties had entered into a development contract in respect of a site in Wandsworth, under which balancing compensation was to be paid. They disagreed as to its calculation. Persimmon sought rectification to reflect the negotiations.
Held: The appeal succeeded. There were difficulties in construing the contract. The contract came to be read after a period of sharp falls in value which were not reflected comfortably in the words used, and the phrase ‘additional residential payment’ made no particular commercial sense. It was necessary for it to be clear first that the language had gone awry, and second what a reasonable bystander would have understood the parties to have meant. Those conditions being satisfied, the appeal was allowed.
Evidence of negotiations can be given to establish that ‘a fact which may be relevant as background was known to the parties’. It was also argued that the course pre-contractual negotiations should be allowed and taken into account in construing the contract. There was however no clear case shown for departing from this exclusionary rule or changing what is now settled practice.
The court should consider ‘what a reasonable person having all the background knowledge which would have been available to the parties would have understood them to be using the language in the contract to mean.’
Lord Hoffmann noted that prior negotiations might be relevant for purposes other than the drawing of inferences about what the contract means.
As to the cases of East and KPMG, he said: ‘What is clear from these cases is that there is not, so to speak, a limit to the amount of red ink or verbal rearrangement or correction which the court is allowed. All that is required is that it should be clear that something has gone wrong with the language and that it should be clear what a reasonable person would have understood the parties to have meant. In my opinion, both of these requirements are satisfied.’
Lord Hoffmann said: ‘words used as labels are seldom arbitrary’
Lord Hoffmann (obiter) where the document of which rectification is sought is a written contract, the relevant test of intention is purely ‘objective’ – meaning by this what a reasonable observer with knowledge of the background facts and prior communications between the parties would have thought their common intention at the time of contracting to be.

Judges:

Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe and Baroness Hale of Richmond

Citations:

[2009] UKHL 38, Times 02-Jul-2009, [2009] 27 EG 91, [2009] BLR 551, 125 Con LR 1, [2009] 3 WLR 267, [2010] 1 P and CR 9, [2009] Bus LR 1200, [2009] NPC 86, [2009] CILL 2729, [2009] 4 All ER 677, [2009] 1 AC 1101, [2009] WLR (D) 223

Links:

Bailii, WLRD, HL

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At first instanceChartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd and Another ChD 2-Mar-2007
The claimants had entered into an agreement with the defendant house-builder for the development of a site which the claimants had recently acquired. The structure of the agreement was that the developer would obtain planning permission and, under . .
Appeal fromChartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd CA 12-Mar-2008
Owners of land (Chartbrook) made a contract with a developer (Persimmon) granting Persimmon a licence to develop the land for commercial and residential use. Planning permission was granted and the development was built. The sums payable to . .
CitedA and J Inglis v Buttery and Co CA 1877
Surrounding circumstances are not admissible for any purpose of finding out which words the parties intended to use rather than did use in their contract. Lord Justice Clerk Moncreiff said that in all mercantile contracts ‘whether they be clear and . .
CitedRiver Wear Commissioners v Adamson HL 1877
It was not necessary for there to be an ambiguity in a statutory provision for a court to be allowed to look at the surrounding circumstances.
As to the Golden Rule of interpretation: ‘It is to be borne in mind that the office of the judge is . .
CitedPrenn v Simmonds HL 1971
Backgroun Used to Construe Commercial Contract
Commercial contracts are to be construed in the light of all the background information which could reasonably have been expected to have been available to the parties in order to ascertain what would objectively have been understood to be their . .
CitedBirmingham City Council v Walker HL 16-May-2007
The tenant was the son of the former tenant. The tenancy had originally been in the ownership of his father and his mother. The father died in 1969, when the tenancy not yet a secure tenancy. On the mother’s death, the council argued that the first . .
CitedA and J Inglis v Buttery and Co HL 1878
The presumption is that a contract document expresses all the terms in the contract with the effect that the court will only look to the document ‘in determining what the contract really was and what it really meant. Lord Blackburn preferred the . .
CitedKPMG Llp v Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd CA 27-Apr-2007
The parties disputed the interpretation of a break clause in their lease. Carnwath LJ said that courts should not readily accept that parties have made mistakes in formal documents: ‘correction of mistakes by construction’ is not a separate branch . .
CitedAlexiou and Another v Campbell PC 26-Feb-2007
(the Bahamas) . .
CitedKirin-Amgen Inc and others v Hoechst Marion Roussel Limited and others etc HL 21-Oct-2004
The claims arose in connection with the validity and alleged infringement of a European Patent on erythropoietin (‘EPO’).
Held: ‘Construction is objective in the sense that it is concerned with what a reasonable person to whom the utterance . .
CitedBank of Credit and Commerce International SA v Ali, Khan and others (No 1); BCCI v Ali HL 1-Mar-2001
Cere Needed Releasing Future Claims
A compromise agreement which appeared to claim to settle all outstanding claims between the employee and employer, did not prevent the employee later claiming for stigma losses where, at the time of the agreement, the circumstances which might lead . .
CitedEast v Pantiles Plant Hire Ltd CA 1981
The court considered the circumstances under which rectification could properly be ordered in respect of a deed. Brightman LJ said: ‘It is clear on the authorities that a mistake in a written instrument can, in certain limited circumstances, be . .
CitedJumbo King Ltd v Faithful Properties Ltd 2-Dec-1999
(Court of Final Appeal of Hong Kong) . .
CitedInvestors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society HL 19-Jun-1997
Account taken of circumstances wihout ambiguity
The respondent gave advice on home income plans. The individual claimants had assigned their initial claims to the scheme, but later sought also to have their mortgages in favour of the respondent set aside.
Held: Investors having once . .
CitedMannai Investment Co Ltd v Eagle Star Assurance HL 21-May-1997
Minor Irregularity in Break Notice Not Fatal
Leases contained clauses allowing the tenant to break the lease by serving not less than six months notice to expire on the third anniversary of the commencement date of the term of the lease. The tenant gave notice to determine the leases on 12th . .
CitedCountess of Rutland’s Case 1604
Popham CJ said: ‘it would be inconvenient, that matters in writing made by advice and on consideration, and which finally import the certain truth of the agreement of the parties should be controlled by averment of the parties to be proved by the . .
CitedHomburg Houtimport BV v Agrosin Private Ltd (the ‘Starsin’) HL 13-Mar-2003
Cargo owners sought damages for their cargo which had been damaged aboard the ship. The contract had been endorsed with additional terms. That variation may have changed the contract from a charterer’s to a shipowner’s bill.
Held: The specific . .
CitedBratton Seymour Service Co Ltd v Oxborough CA 1992
The company was set up to acquire and manage a property divided into flats which also included ‘amenity areas’ (tennis courts, swimming pool, gardens). It was argued that there should be implied into the articles of association an obligation on the . .
CitedPepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart HL 26-Nov-1992
Reference to Parliamentary Papers behind Statute
The inspector sought to tax the benefits in kind received by teachers at a private school in having their children educated at the school for free. Having agreed this was a taxable emolument, it was argued as to whether the taxable benefit was the . .
CitedPractice Statement (Judicial Precedent) HL 1966
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 . .
CitedPartenreedesei Karen Oltmann v Scarsdale Shipping Co Ltd (The Karen Oltmann) 1976
The parties disputed the application of the word ‘after’ in a break-clause in a charter party which provided that ‘Charterers to have the option to redeliver the vessel after 12 months’ trading subject giving 3 months’ notice’. By their negotiations . .
CitedShore v Wilson 1842
Parke B said: ‘In the first place, there is no doubt that not only where the language of the instrument is such as the Court does not understand, it is competent to receive evidence of the proper meaning of that language, as when it is written in a . .
CitedRegina v National Insurance Commissioner, Ex parte Hudson HL 1972
The House considered whether it would have power to make a ruling with prospective effect only. Lord Diplock said the matter deserved further consideration; Lord Simon said that the possibility of prospective overruling should be seriously . .
CitedAntaios Compania Naviera SA v Salen Rederierna AB (‘the Antaios’) HL 1984
A ship charterer discovered that the bills of lading were incorrect, but delayed withdrawal from the charter for 13 days. They now sought leave to appeal the arbitration award against them.
Held: Though he deprecated extending the use of the . .
CitedStevens and others v Bell and others CA 20-May-2002
Interpretation of the trustees’ powers with respect to surplus under the Airways Pension Scheme
Orse British Airways Pension Trustees Ltd v British Airways Plc . .

Cited by:

CitedSigma Finance Corporation, Re; (in administrative receivership) SC 29-Oct-2009
The court considered how the losses of the insolvent company were to be distributed as between secured creditors and preferential creditors, given the terms of the applicable trust deed.
Held: The court considered the interpretations of the . .
CitedWestvilla Properties Ltd v Dow Properties Ltd ChD 15-Jan-2010
The owner sought specific performance of its contract to sell land to the defendant. The land was subject to a proposed lease which the defendant had concluded was uncertain and unattractive, and claimed to have rescinded the contract.
Held: . .
CitedOceanbulk Shipping and Trading Sa v TMT Asia Ltd CA 15-Feb-2010
The parties had settled their disagreement, but now disputed the interpretation of the settlement. The defendant sought to be allowed to give in evidence correspondence leading up to the settlement which had been conducted on a without prejudice . .
CitedHorwood and Others v Land of Leather Ltd and Others ComC 18-Mar-2010
The claimants sought to claim for personal injuries against the defendant company, now in administration, and their insurers using the 1930 Act. The insurers said they were not liable to indemnify the company. The parties disputed the standing of an . .
CitedPink Floyd Music Ltd and Another v EMI Records Ltd ChD 11-Mar-2010
The claimant sought summary judgment for a claim under Licensing agreements under which the defendants had marketed and sold the claimant’s products. The remaining disputes concerned differences as to royalties from digital downloads sold through . .
CitedAshcroft v Barnsdale and Others ChD 30-Jul-2010
The parties sought to rectify a deed of family arrangement varying a will. The variation deed had had several mistakes which in fact increased the sum of Inheritance Tax owed. HMRC refused to accept the rectification deed unless approved by the . .
CitedWickens v Cheval Property Developments Ltd ChD 8-Sep-2010
The buyer of land sought a reduction in the purchase price complaining of the removal of several items (worth possibly andpound;300,000) by intruders after exchange. The seller said that the fixtures had been excluded under the contract.
Held: . .
CitedOceanbulk Shipping and Trading Sa v TMT Asia Ltd and Others SC 27-Oct-2010
The court was asked whether facts which (a) are communicated between the parties in the course of without prejudice negotiations and (b) would, but for the without prejudice rule, be admissible as part of the factual matrix or surrounding . .
CitedFarstad Supply As v Enviroco Ltd SC 6-Apr-2011
The court was asked by the parties to a charterparty whether one of them is an ‘Affiliate’ of the charterer for the purposes of provisions in a charterparty by which both the owner and the charterer agreed to indemnify and hold each other harmless . .
CitedAutoclenz Ltd v Belcher and Others SC 27-Jul-2011
Car Cleaning nil-hours Contractors were Workers
The company contracted with the claimants to work cleaning cars. The company appealed against a finding that contrary to the explicit provisions of the contracts, they were workers within the Regulations and entitled to holiday pay and associated . .
CitedRainy Sky Sa and Others v Kookmin Bank SC 2-Nov-2011
Commercial Sense Used to Interpret Contract
The Court was asked as to the role of commercial good sense in the construction of a term in a contract which was open to alternative interpretations.
Held: The appeal succeeded. In such a case the court should adopt the more, rather than the . .
CitedCampbell v Daejan Properties Ltd CA 20-Nov-2012
The tenant appealed against an order requiring the amendment of what was found to be an obvious error in the lease as to the responsibility of the lessor to make repairs to certain walls and rooves, and the apportionment of liability for payment of . .
CitedAJ Building and Plastering Ltd v Turner and Others QBD 11-Mar-2013
An insurance company had engaged a main contractor to handle repairs to houses insured under its policies. The contractor had engaged the claimant subcontractor to carry out the works at the defendants’ homes, but then went into insolvent . .
CitedPink Floyd Music Ltd and Another v EMI Records Ltd CA 14-Dec-2010
The defendant appealed against an order made on the claimant’s assertion that there were due to it substantial underpayments of royalties over many years. The issues were as to the construction of licensing agreements particularly in the context of . .
CitedDaventry District Council v Daventry and District Housing Ltd CA 13-Oct-2011
The appellant challenged refusal of rectification of its agreement with the defendant. They asserted either mutual or unilateral mistake. The parties had agreed for the transfer of housing stock and management staff to the respondents. The claimant . .
CitedMarley v Rawlings and Another SC 22-Jan-2014
A husband and wife had each executed the will which had been prepared for the other, owing to an oversight on the part of their solicitor; the question which arose was whether the will of the husband, who died after his wife, was valid. The parties . .
CitedSugarman and Others v CJS Investments Llp and Others CA 19-Sep-2014
The parties were apartment owners in a development, each owning shares in the management company. They disputed the interpreation of the Articles as to whether the owner of more than one apartment was still restricted to one vote at member meetings, . .
CitedLloyds TSB Bank Plc v Crowborough Properties Ltd and Others CA 12-Feb-2013
The court was asked whether Lloyds TSB Bank Plc was entitled to rectify the terms of a compromise embodied in the schedule to a Tomlin order. . .
CitedArnold v Britton and Others SC 10-Jun-2015
Absurdity did not defeat a clear clause
A standard lease of plots on a caravan park, contained a provision which appeared to increase the rent by 10% in each year. The tenants argued that such a substantial increase could not have been intended.
Held: The tenants’ appeal failed . .
CitedRadford and Another v Frade and Others QBD 8-Jul-2016
The court was asked as to the terms on which solicitors and Counsel were retained to act for the defendants. The appeals did not raise any issues concerning costs practice, and were by way of review of the Costs Judge’s rulings, and not by way of . .
Not applicableJump and Another v Lister and Another ChD 12-Aug-2016
Omnibus Survivorship Clauses
Wills for two people hade been drafted with survivorship clauses which provided for others according to the order in which they died, but in the event, having died together it had been impossible to say which died first. The parties disputed the . .
CitedCavendish Square Holding Bv v Talal El Makdessi; ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis SC 4-Nov-2015
The court reconsidered the law relating to penalty clauses in contracts. The first appeal, Cavendish Square Holding BV v Talal El Makdessi, raised the issue in relation to two clauses in a substantial commercial contract. The second appeal, . .
CitedWright and Another (Liquidators of SHB Realisations Ltd) v The Prudential Assurance Company Ltd ChD 6-Mar-2018
IVA is a special form of contract
Liquidators asked the court whether sums sought by the insolvent company’s landlords were payable and or provable. Under an IVA, the copany had been paying reduced rents, but the arrangement document provided that the full rents would be restored on . .
CitedBNY Mellon Corporate Trustee Services Ltd v LBG Capital No 1 Plc and Another SC 16-Jun-2016
The Court was asked whether Lloyds Banking Group was entitled to redeem 3.3 billion pounds of loan notes which would otherwise carry a relatively high rate of interest, namely over 10% per annum. The loan notes are contingent convertible securities . .
Not FollowedFSHC Group Holdings Ltd v Glas Trust Corporation Ltd CA 31-Jul-2019
Rectification – Chartbrook not followed
Opportunity for an appellate court to clarify the correct test to apply in deciding whether the written terms of a contract may be rectified because of a common mistake.
Held: The appeal failed. The judge was right to conclude that an . .
CitedLehman Brothers International (Europe) v Exotix Partners Llp ChD 9-Sep-2019
The parties had contracted to trade global depository notes issued by the Peruvian government. Each made mistakes as to their true value, thinking them scraps worth a few thousand dollars, whereas their true value was over $8m. On the defendant . .
CitedBarnardo’s v Buckinghamshire and Others SC 7-Nov-2018
The Court considered the interpretation of a clause in a pension scheme trust deed which defines the phrase ‘Retail Prices Index’ and which allows the trustees of the pension scheme to adopt a ‘replacement’ of the officially published Retail Prices . .
CitedThe Financial Conduct Authority and Others v Arch Insurance (UK) Ltd and Others SC 15-Jan-2021
Many businesses, having been ordered to suspend business during the Covid-19 epidemic, sought to claim under business interruption insurance. The claims were rejected by the insurers and the insurers now appealed from a finding that they had been . .
CitedR and S Pilling (T/A Phoenix Engineering) v UK Insurance Ltd SC 27-Mar-2019
The driver’s car failed its MOT., He took it to private premises to repair. In those repairs, inflammable materials ignited and the fire spread those premises and adjoining third party premises. The premise’ insurers paid the owners of both and . .
CitedLondon Borough of Lambeth v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and Others SC 3-Jul-2019
The second respondent sought a certificate from the Council determining that the lawful use of its store extended to sales of unlimited categories of goods including food. A certificate to that effect was refused by the Council, but granted by a . .
CitedLondon Borough of Lambeth v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Others CA 20-Apr-2018
The parties disputed the validity of the time-limit condition (condition 1), which required the ‘development to which this permission relates’ to be begun within three years.
Held: The Court upheld the inspector’s decision that this condition . .
CitedLondon Borough of Lambeth v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government and Others SC 3-Jul-2019
The second respondent sought a certificate from the Council determining that the lawful use of its store extended to sales of unlimited categories of goods including food. A certificate to that effect was refused by the Council, but granted by a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Contract, Evidence, Equity

Leading Case

Updated: 16 April 2022; Ref: scu.368925

Edward Draycott v Draycott Talbot, And Others: PC 28 Jan 1718

The entry of the name and titles of persons in a church book, either for marriages or births, cannot be positive evidence of the marriage or birth of any person ; unless the identity of the person named in such entries is fully proved, and strengthened also with circumstances of co-habitation, or the allowance of parties.

Citations:

[1718] EngR 68, (1718) 3 Bro PC 564, (1718) 1 ER 1501

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Evidence, Family

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.390552

Clifford v Clifford: 1961

The court stated the common law position of the cross examination of a defendant on his antecedents. Cairns J said: ‘The range of permissible cross-examination as to credit is, however, a very wide one. It has never, I think, been doubted that a conviction for any offence could be put to a witness by way of cross-examination as to credit, even though the offence was not one of dishonesty.’

Judges:

Cairns J

Citations:

[1961] 1 WLR 1274

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedThomas v Commissioner of Police for Metropolis CA 28-Nov-1996
In an action for damages and false imprisonment, the defendant police officers sought to have introduced the claimant’s previous criminal record, which was expired under the 1974 Act.
Held: The judge had been correct not to follow practice in . .
CitedWatson v Cleveland Police CA 12-Oct-2001
The defendant appealed an award of damages in favour of the applicant for assault by police officers whilst held in police custody. The said the judge should have allowed the claimant’s criminal record in in full.
Held: The judge had directed . .
CitedDickinson v Yates CA 27-Nov-1986
The claimant sought damages against the police for assault, wrongful arrest, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution arising from an arrest for a suspected drink-driving offence. He was acquitted of charges of assaulting a police officer in the . .
CitedHussain and Others v London Borough of Waltham Forest UTLC 5-Nov-2019
Housing – Licensing under parts 2 and 3 of the Housing Act 2004 – requirement for a licence holder to be a ‘fit and proper person’ – Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 – treatment of spent convictions of a rehabilitated person and related criminal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.195575

Regina (Howe) v South Durham Magistrates Court: QBD 13 Feb 2004

The defendant was convicted of driving whilst disqualified. He had put the prosecution to proof of the fact that it was he who had been prosecuted. The prosecution called his solicitor to give evidence that it was his client who had been banned on the earlier occasion.
Held: The solicitor was being asked not about private matters but about matters which had occurred in open court. Accordingly no question of privilege arose, and the approach was proper.

Judges:

Rose LJ, Savid Clarke J

Citations:

Times 26-Feb-2004, [2004] EWHC 362

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Manchester Crown Court ex parte Rogers (Legal Professional Privilege) Admn 2-Feb-1999
The police had sought disclosure from the applicant’s solicitors of records of the time at which the applicant arrived at the solicitors’ premises on a particular date and like documents.
Held: Such records are not privileged because they did . .
CitedRegina v Derby Magistrates Court Ex Parte B HL 19-Oct-1995
No Breach of Solicitor Client Confidence Allowed
B was charged with the murder of a young girl. He made a confession to the police, but later changed his story, saying his stepfather had killed the girl. He was acquitted. The stepfather was then charged with the murder. At his committal for trial, . .

Cited by:

CitedCunliffe, Regina (on the Application of) v West London Magistrates’ Court Admn 6-Jul-2006
The claimant was an employee of the company manufacturing alcohol measuring devices. He sought judicial review of decisions by magistrates to require him to attend court to give evidence which would require him to breach obligations of confidence he . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Evidence

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.194784

Regina v Okolie: CACD 16 Jun 2000

Evidence is always required on matters relating to foreign law, and such evidence given in person unless it was agreed or no issue was taken. Untranslated reports of stolen vehicles prepared by employees of the person who claimed to have been the victim of the theft had been incorrectly relied upon by the judge.

Citations:

Times 16-Jun-2000

Citing:

CitedRegina v Ofori, Regina v Tackie CA 17-Nov-1993
Court has power to grant bail or to release a person, pending their appeal despite the existence of a deportation order. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Criminal Practice

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.85438

Neill v North Antrim Justices and Another: HL 3 Mar 1993

First degree hearsay evidence is inadmissible when used in an application to show the cause of a witness not attending court. In judicial review proceedings in relation to committal proceedings the test is ‘whether or not a really substantial error leading to demonstrable injustice had occurred.’ and Latham LJ: ‘It seems to us that the touchstone is the touchstone of injustice. The question in each case that has to be asked is whether the procedural defect which has occurred is one which has worked injustice to the defendant.’

Judges:

Lord Mustill, Latham LJ

Citations:

Gazette 03-Mar-1993, [1993] 97 Cr App R 121

Cited by:

CitedBrizzalari v Regina CACD 19-Feb-2004
Limits to Requests for Adverse Inferences
In closing, prosecuting counsel had suggested that during the trial two matters had been mentioned by the defence which had not been mentioned earlier, and that the jury should feel free to draw proper inferences under the 1984 Act from that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.84242

Mills and Others v The Queen: PC 1 Mar 1995

A judge’s identification direction need not always warn on the need for witnesses to be convincing. An unsworn statement from a defendant is significantly inferior to oral evidence.

Citations:

Times 01-Mar-1995, [1995] 1 WLR 511

Cited by:

CitedAlexander Von Starck v The Queen PC 28-Feb-2000
(Jamaica) The defendant had fatally stabbed a woman. On arrest, he admitted killing her and that he had the knife which he had used to do so. He gave the police officer a pouch containing a knife, on which blood of the same group as that of the . .
CitedAnderson v HM Advocate HCJ 1996
The court considered the effect on a conviction of a failure by defence counsel. After considering the authorities: ‘It can only be said to have resulted in a miscarriage of justice if it has deprived the accused of his right to a fair trial. That . .
CitedBally Sheng Balson v The State PC 2-Feb-2005
PC (Dominica) The appellant had been convicted of the murder of his partner and appealed the conviction.
Held: The case did not fall within the case of Anderson, and counsel’s failure was not such as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Evidence, Commonwealth

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.83731

KPMG Peat Marwick McLintock v The HLT Group: QBD 18 Mar 1994

The plaintiffs claimed for professional fees, and the defendants counter-claimed alleging negligence. The plaintiffs obtained summary judgment under Order 14 with an order for costs on the standard basis, to be taxed if not agreed. The plaintiffs had instructed solicitors in the City of London to represent them in the litigation and there was an issue as to the amount charged by those solicitors for the work which they had undertaken. The taxing officer had disregarded a survey published by the London Solicitors’ Litigation Association showing the broad average direct hourly cost for City solicitors. He had applied lower rates to taxation of the claimant’s costs on the basis that the survey rates were substantially higher than the rates which he had been in the habit of permitting on taxation.
Held: A survey of solicitors’ charge rates was admissible on taxation of costs. The taxing master should have allowed the actual rates claimed which were, in fact, marginally lower than the survey rates.
Auld J said: ‘The taxing officer’s task, as Robert Goff J put it in R v Wilkinson [1980] 1 All ER 597 at 604, [1980] 1 WLR 396 at 404, is to determine ‘the broad average direct costs of work done’ by a partner and assistant solicitor ‘ in the relevant area at the relevant time’ . . In my view, Master Ellis was wrong to regard as unreasonable, ‘the broad average direct costs’ of City of London solicitors for such a case. His approach was contrary to authority . . If, as I find, it was reasonable for the plaintiffs to have instructed Travers Smith Braithwaite in the litigation, then the firm’s costs on taxation should be taxed by reference to the broad average direct costs for such a firm in that area. The fact that the plaintiffs could have obtained the same services at a much lower price than that average elsewhere is irrelevant (cf R v Dudley Magistrates’ Court, ex p Power City Stores Ltd) . . The taxing officer, when drawing on his own experience, must thus have regard to the general levels of costs actually incurred in the relevant area at the relevant time, not merely those which he has customarily allowed in similar cases. The latter, whilst a useful guide to consistency in the short term, will not reflect the actual general levels of costs unless constantly measured against the reality of what was happening outside the taxing officer’s room during the relevant period . . The process of taxation must reflect, not set, the reasonableness of costs incurred in litigation.’

Judges:

Auld J

Citations:

Independent 18-Mar-1994, [1995] 2 All ER 180

Citing:

CitedSmith v Buller 1875
The plaintiff in a patent case had failed, and now objected to the amount of costs claimed by the defendant.
Held: Sir R Malins V-C said: ‘It is of great importance to litigants who are unsuccessful that they should not be oppressed by having . .
ApprovedIn Re a Company (No 004081 of 1989) 1995
Lindsay J considered the calculation of costs of solicitors: ‘if . . the proper guide is that of the average solicitor employed by the average firm in the area concerned, then the Central London Law Societies’ survey, whilst not necessarily a . .

Cited by:

CitedThe Law Society of England and Wales, Regina (on The Application of) v The Lord Chancellor Admn 15-Jun-2010
Costs restriction not made under Act
The respondent had introduced rules which restricted the levels of costs which might be awarded from central funds to a successful defendant in a criminal trial who had take private representation. The amendment was made under powers in the 1985 . .
CitedRoyal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust v Acres QBD 22-Mar-2013
The defendant challenged the use by the claimant of solicitors from Central London in her claim for personal injury. She was a radiographer, and her work involved exposure to dangerous materials, though in this case it arose from use of machinery . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Legal Professions, Evidence

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.82833

In Re AB (A Minor) (Medical Issues: Expert Evidence): FD 17 Aug 1994

An expert witness in child abuse cases was to explain all aspects of any controversial theory.

Citations:

Times 17-Aug-1994, (1995) 1FLR 192

Cited by:

CitedA and D v B and E FD 13-Jun-2003
In two separate actions, fathers with parental responsibility sought orders requiring the mothers of their children to ensure they received the MMR vaccine. Each mother objected, having suspicions as to the safety of the treatment. Specific issue . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Evidence

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81685

Freemantle v The Queen: PC 7 Jul 1994

The judge’s warning to the jury about its dangers is needed, when the jury were being asked to consider uncorroborated visual identification evidence, unless, and exceptionally, the evidence is of such good quality as to stand without a warning. In this case though, although the direction was defective, the two eye witnesses had known the defendant for several years.

Citations:

Ind Summary 29-Aug-1994, Gazette 12-Oct-1994, Times 07-Jul-1994, [1994] 1 WLR 1437

Cited by:

CitedBertrand Roberts and Roland Roberts v The State PC 15-Jan-2003
PC (Trinidad and Tobago) The appellants had been convicted of murder and their capital sentences commuted. They now sought to challenge the convictions as to the admission of and directions given on the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Criminal Practice, Commonwealth

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.80681

Cheltenham and Gloucester Building Society v Grant: CA 23 May 1994

The District Judge is to exercise his discretion informally on suspending possession, and need not apply the rules of evidence rigidly. He may consider that the defendant has sufficent means to support a clearance of the arrears over a reasonable period of time and thus to suspend the rder for possession, without taking direct evidence from him.

Citations:

Ind Summary 23-May-1994, Times 09-May-1994

Statutes:

Administration of Justice Act 1970, Administration of Justice Act 1973 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing, Litigation Practice, Land, Evidence

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79010

A T and T Istel Ltd v Tully: HL 9 Sep 1992

The second plaintff had agreed to supply computer systems to a health authority. New owners of the company discovered allegations that the contract had been operated fraudulently. An order had been obtained for production of documents, but the order restricted the use which could be made of the information disclosed. The Court of Appeal held that it was not open to the court to devise protection in substitution for the defendants’ privilege against self-incrimination, and that the plaintiffs’ claim was neither proprietary nor within section 72 of the Supreme Court Act 1981.
Held: The privilege against self incrimination survives only where there is a continuing threat of prosecution. The prohibition on the questioning of suspects without caution or after charge is a prophylactic rule designed to inhibit abuse of power by investigatory authorities and to preserve the fairness of the trial by preventing the eliciting of confessions which may have doubtful probative value.
Lord Templeman discussed the privilege against self-incrimination, saying: ‘the privilege can only be justified on two grounds, first that it discourages the ill-treatment of a suspect and secondly that it discourages the production of dubious confessions. Neither of these considerations applies to the present appeal. It is difficult to see any reason why in civil proceedings the privilege against self-incrimination should be exercisable so as to enable a litigant to refuse relevant and even vital documents which are in his possession or power and which speak for themselves.
I regard the privilege . . exercisable in civil proceedings as an archaic and unjustifiable survival from the past when the court directs the production of relevant documents and requires the defendant to specify his dealings with the plaintiff’s property or money.’
Lord Griffiths: ‘the privilege [against self-incrimination] . . is in need of radical reappraisal. It is however deeply embedded in English law and can only be removed or moderated by Parliament . . [which] has in recent years made many inroads into the privilege in a number of statutes. In civil actions . . the privilege can be claimed to thwart the claims of victims of fraud. I can for myself see no argument in favour of the privilege against producing a document the contents of which may go to show that the holder has committed a criminal offence.’
Lord Lowry also discussed the ambit of section 72(2) saying that it: ‘shows that the relevant information has to be intellectual property in order that section 72 may apply and the appellants submitted that the relevant information here is ‘commercial information’ within the meaning of sub-section (5). In my opinion, the information with which your Lordships are here concerned simply does not fit into the definition in the subsection. Even if it were not already obvious, the concluding words, ‘or other intellectual property’, show that the ‘commercial information’ which the definition contemplates must be information of the same type (ejusdem generis) as the other examples of intellectual property which are listed in sub-section (5). The information with which this case is concerned does not pass that test and this action is not concerned with the infringement of any rights pertaining to intellectual property. On this part of the case I respectfully agree with the observations of Lord Donaldson MR and Neill LJ in the Court of Appeal.’

Judges:

Lord Templeman, Lord Griffiths, Lord Lowry

Citations:

Gazette 09-Sep-1992, [1993] AC 45, [1992] 3 All ER 523, [1992] 3 WLR 344

Statutes:

Supreme Court Act 1981 72

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromA T and T Istel Ltd and Another v Tully and Others CA 15-Jan-1992
An order that the results of disclosure were not to be used in criminal proceedings was enough to protect the defendant. The privilege against self incrimination could be over-ridden in this way, even if that privilege should be lightly set aside. . .

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Hertfordshire County Council, ex parte Green Environmental Industries Ltd and Another HL 17-Feb-2000
A notice was given to the holder of a waste disposal licence to require certain information to be provided on pain of prosecution. The provision of such information could also then be evidence against the provider of the commission of a criminal . .
CitedC Plc and W v P and Secretary of State for the Home Office and the Attorney General ChD 26-May-2006
The claimant sought damages from the first defendant for breach of copyright. An ex parte search order had been executed, with the defendant asserting his privilege against self-incrimination. As computer disks were examined, potentially unlawful . .
CitedC Plc v P and Attorney General Intervening CA 22-May-2007
The respondent had been subject to a civil search, which revealed the existence of obscene images of children on his computer. He appealed against refusal of an order that the evidence should not be passed to the police as evidence. He said that the . .
CitedGray v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another; Coogan v Same ChD 25-Feb-2011
The claimants said that agents of the defendant had unlawfully accessed their mobile phone systems. The court was now asked whether the agent (M) could rely on the privilege against self incrimination, and otherwise as to the progress of the case. . .
CitedPhillips v Mulcaire SC 24-May-2012
The claimant worked as personal assistant to a well known public relations company. She alleged that the defendant had intercepted telephone message given by and left for her. The court was asked first as to whether the information amounted to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Human Rights

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.77583

AMDC v AG and Another: CoP 18 Nov 2020

Guidance for Expert Witnesses on Capacity

The court was asked as to the preparation and use of expert reports as to the capacity of a patient litigant.
Held: Poole J discussed what was need of expert witness in such cases: ‘it will benefit the court if the expert bears in mind the following:
a. An expert report on capacity is not a clinical assessment but should seek to assist the court to determine certain identified issues. The expert should therefore pay close regard to (i) the terms of the Mental Capacity Act and Code of Practice, and (ii) the letter of instruction.
b. The letter of instruction should, as it did in this case, identify the decisions under consideration, the relevant information for each decision, the need to consider the diagnostic and functional elements of capacity, and the causal relationship between any impairment and the inability to decide. It will assist the court if the expert structures their report accordingly. If an expert witness is unsure what decisions they are being asked to consider, what the relevant information is in respect to those decisions, or any other matter relevant to the making of their report, they should ask for clarification.
c. It is important that the parties and the court can see from their reports that the expert has understood and applied the presumption of capacity and the other fundamental principles set out at section 1 of the MCA 2005.
d. In cases where the expert assesses capacity in relation to more than one decision,
i. broad-brush conclusions are unlikely to be as helpful as specific conclusions as to the capacity to make each decision;
ii. experts should ensure that their opinions in relation to each decision are consistent and coherent.
e. An expert report should not only state the expert’s opinions, but also explain the basis of each opinion. The court is unlikely to give weight to an opinion unless it knows on what evidence it was based, and what reasoning led to it being formed.
f. If an expert changes their opinion on capacity following re-assessment or otherwise, they ought to provide a full explanation of why their conclusion has changed.
g. The interview with P need not be fully transcribed in the body of the report (although it might be provided in an appendix), but if the expert relies on a particular exchange or something said by P during interview, then at least an account of what was said should be included.
h. If on assessment P does not engage with the expert, then the expert is not required mechanically to ask P about each and every piece of relevant information if to do so would be obviously futile or even aggravating. However, the report should record what attempts were made to assist P to engage and what alternative strategies were used. If an expert hits a ‘brick wall’ with P then they might want to liaise with others to formulate alternative strategies to engage P. The expert might consider what further bespoke education or support can be given to P to promote P’s capacity or P’s engagement in the decisions which may have to be taken on their behalf. Failure to take steps to assist P to engage and to support her in her decision-making would be contrary to the fundamental principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 ss 1(3) and 3(2).’

Judges:

Poole J

Citations:

[2020] EWCOP 58

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedSheffield City Council v E; Re E (An Alleged Patient) FD 2-Dec-2004
The council sought an order to prevent E, a patient from contracting a marriage which it considered unwise. As a preliminary issue the parties sought guidance as to the questions to be put to the expert as to capacity.
Held: The woman suffered . .
CitedLBL v RYJ and Another CoP 22-Sep-2010
Whether RYJ lacked capacity to litigate.
Held: For such capacity the person must understand the salient information but not necessarily all the peripheral detail. . .
CitedCheshire West and Chester Council v P and Another COP 14-Jun-2011
The patient, an adult without capacity and with Down’s syndrome and cerebral palsy complained of his treatment, when in order to prevent his habit of eating his nappy, they dressed him in an adult babygrow costume. The court was asked whether the . .
CitedPH v A Local Authority CoP 30-Jun-2011
The Court was asked whether PH, a forty-nine year old man, suffering from Huntingdon’s Disease had capacity to make decisions about his residence, care and treatment. . .
CitedLondon Borough of Tower Hamlets v NB (Consent to Sex) CoP 16-Jul-2019
The Court considered the capacity of the patient to consent to sexual relations.
Held: The criteria by which capacity is evaluated on any particular issue should not be confined within artificial or conceptual silos but applied in a way which . .
CitedLondon Borough of Tower Hamlets v PB CoP 3-Jul-2020
Whether PB had capacity to litigate.
Held: Hayden J gave guidance as to the general approach to be taken by the court when determining an issue of capacity: ‘i. The obligation of this Court to protect P is not confined to physical, emotional . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Health

Updated: 07 April 2022; Ref: scu.656017

Regina v Musquera: CACD 1999

The court observed that, while the decision in DPP v P had eliminated the necessity to identify a striking similarity, it was still necessary to invoke some identifiable common feature or features constituting a significant connection and going beyond mere propensity or coincidence. ‘It is certainly the case that when the issue is . . . that a particular witness is lying, a lesser degree of similarity between the two allegations is likely to suffice to make them cross-admissible than when the issue is, for example, the identity of the defendant . . ..’ but ‘ . . it is still necessary to invoke some common identifiable feature or features constituting a significant connection and going beyond mere propensity of co-incidence.’

Judges:

Potter LJ

Citations:

[1999] Crim LR 857

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v P HL 1991
The defendant faced specimen counts of rape and incest against each of his two daughters. The trial judge refused an application for separate trials in respect of the offences alleged against each daughter. The defendant was convicted.
Held: . .

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Venn CACD 1-Feb-2003
The defendant appealed convictions for sexual assault against four young girls.
Held: The admissibility of ‘similar fact’ evidence depends upon the degree of its relevance. If only suggests propensity it is inadmissible. If it goes further and . .
CitedBrizzalari v Regina CACD 19-Feb-2004
Limits to Requests for Adverse Inferences
In closing, prosecuting counsel had suggested that during the trial two matters had been mentioned by the defence which had not been mentioned earlier, and that the jury should feel free to draw proper inferences under the 1984 Act from that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.181003

Regina (Crown Prosecution Service) v Brentford Youth Court: QBD 2 Oct 2003

The prosecutor appealed a ruling that the video evidence of a handicapped child should be given in its full form.
Held: The child’s evidence could not properly be understood without the references to irrelevant matters. The whole tape should therefore be played. Otherwise it would not be proper to include irrelevant matters just because the evidence was given by video.

Citations:

Times 09-Oct-2003

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Evidence

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.186972

Regina (D) v Camberwell Green Youth Court; Regina (N) v Same etc: Admn 4 Feb 2002

Defendants appealed orders allowing children to give evidence by video link, and children appealed orders requiring them to attend court to give evidence.
Held: The right to a fair trial had to be interpreted broadly. Special measures taken to protect children did not infringe the Article 6 rights of defendants. The rules allowed safeguards to protect the fairness of the trial. The magistrates needed to approach the article differently.

Citations:

Times 13-Feb-2003, [2003] EWHC 227 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6, Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromD (A Minor), Regina (on the Application of) v Camberwell Green Youth Court HL 27-Jan-2005
The defendant challenged the obligatory requirement that evidence given by a person under 17 in sex or violent offence cases must normally be given by video link.
Held: The purpose of the section was to improve the quality of the evidence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Human Rights, Children, Criminal Practice, Magistrates, Evidence

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.184963

The Secretary of State for Health and Another v Servier Laboratories Ltd and Others: CA 27 Jun 2019

The Court was asked how far the EU law principle of res judicata can be relied on by the Appellants as establishing facts which they wish to prove in their defences to the damages claims brought by the Respondents. Servier submits that certain factual findings were made in its favour by the General Court when giving judgment in an action to annul a competition law infringement decision adopted by the EU Commission.

Judges:

Longmore, Rose LJJ, Sir Stephen Richards

Citations:

[2019] EWCA Civ 1096, [2020] 2 WLR 149, [2020] 1 All ER (Comm) 402, [2019] WLR(D) 366, [2020] 1 All ER 432

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoThe Secretary of State for Health and Another v Servier Laboratories Ltd and Others ChD 2-Aug-2017
Roth J struck out the unlawful means tort claim, saying that, in OBG ‘the ratio of Lord Hoffmann’s determination of the elements of the tort is in para 51’ of his speech: ‘Unlawful means therefore consists of acts intended to cause loss to the . .
Appeal fromThe Secretary of State for Health and Another v Servier Laboratories Ltd ChD 17-Apr-2019
The Court was asked: ‘To what extent, if at all, are factual findings made by the General Court of the European Union in its judgment on an application for annulment of a competition infringement decision of the European Commission binding as res . .

Cited by:

See AlsoThe Secretary of State for Health and Another v Servier Laboratories Ltd and Others CA 12-Jul-2019
Appeal against a paragraph of an order by which the judge struck out the claim of the appellant, the Secretary of State for Health and the NHS Business Services Authority that the third respondent is liable for interfering with the NHS’s economic . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Evidence, Commercial

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.638826

Regina v Jones; Regina v Jenkins: CACD 5 Jun 2003

Where each of more than one defendants asserted that he was not responsible for the crime, the jury should be directed (in addition) that they should consider the case of each defendant separately, the case should be considered as a whole, including looking at he evidence of co-accused, and when considering the evidence of a co-defendant they should allow for any self-serving element, and evidence of co-accused should be considered as for anyone else. The direction was defective, the appeals were allowed, and a retrial ordered.

Judges:

Auld LJ, Silber, Owen JJ

Citations:

Times 19-Jun-2003

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Cheema CACD 5-Sep-1993
There is no rule requiring full a corroboration direction to be given for a co-defendant’s evidence to be admitted. The Court of Appeal recommended a review of law on corroboration of a witness’s evidence. Lord Taylor CJ said: ‘The rule of practice . .
CitedRegina v Knowlden and Knowlden CACD 1983
The court set out warnings for the jury when considering evidence from a co-accused. The rule in Prater was not a rule of law but ultimately in the discretion of the judge: and that ‘the customary clear warning to examine the evidence of each . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Evidence

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.183673

Price Waterhouse v BCCI Holdings (Luxembourg) SA: CA 1992

A claim for legal advice privilege was rejected for reports written by accountants both when the accountants were independent and when they reconstituted themselves as a committee of the client. However, legal advice privilege attaches to all communications made in confidence between solicitors and their clients for the purpose of giving or obtaining legal advice even at a stage when litigation is not in contemplation. It does not matter whether the communication is directly between the client and his legal adviser or is made through an intermediate agent of either.

Judges:

Millett LJ

Citations:

(1992) BCLC 583

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedThree Rivers District Council and others v The Governor and Co of the Bank of England (No 5) CA 3-Apr-2003
Documents had been prepared by the respondent to support a request for legal advice in anticipation of the Bingham enquiry into the collapse of BCCI.
Held: Legal advice privilege attached to the communications between a client and the . .
CitedThree Rivers District Council and others v Governor and Company of the Bank of England (No 6) HL 11-Nov-2004
The Bank anticipated criticism in an ad hoc enquiry which was called to investigate its handling of a matter involving the claimant. The claimant sought disclosure of the documents created when the solicitors advised employees of the Bank in . .
CitedKyla Shipping Co Ltd and Another v Freight Trading Ltd and Others ComC 22-Feb-2022
Litigation Privilege
Defendants challenged the claimants assertion of litigation privilege and contended for a waiver of any privilege which entitles them to disclosure of additional materials referred to in a witness statement.
Held: ‘I dismiss the waiver of . .
CitedStarbev GP Ltd v Interbrew Central European Holding Bv ComC 18-Dec-2013
Challenge to assertion of litigation privilege.
Hamblen J said:
’11. The legal requirements of a claim to litigation privilege may be summarised as follows:
(1) The burden of proof is on the party claiming privilege to establish it . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Evidence

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.180871

Re Highgrade Traders Ltd: CA 1984

The court rejected a claim for legal advice privilege in relation to reports commissioned by an insurance company after a suspected arson. The documents were reports prepared by third parties rather than employees of the company. After considering a number of earlier authorities, held that litigation privilege might be claimed in respect of documents brought into being at a time when litigation was reasonably in prospect.

Judges:

Oliver LJ

Citations:

(1984) BCLC 151

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedWaugh v British Railways Board HL 12-Jul-1979
No Litigation Privilege without Dominant Purpose
An internal report had been prepared by two of the Board’s officers two days after a collision involving the death of a locomotive driver, whose widow brought the action and now sought its production.
Held: The court considered litigation . .

Cited by:

CitedThree Rivers District Council and others v The Governor and Co of the Bank of England (No 5) CA 3-Apr-2003
Documents had been prepared by the respondent to support a request for legal advice in anticipation of the Bingham enquiry into the collapse of BCCI.
Held: Legal advice privilege attached to the communications between a client and the . .
CitedUnited States of America v Philip Morris Inc and Others and British American Tobacco (Investments) Ltd CA 23-Mar-2004
The defendants appealed orders requiring them to produce evidence for use in the courts in the US.
Held: It was the pleasure and duty of British courts to respond positively to a letter of request. Public interest required that a court should . .
CitedThree Rivers District Council and others v Governor and Company of the Bank of England (No 6) HL 11-Nov-2004
The Bank anticipated criticism in an ad hoc enquiry which was called to investigate its handling of a matter involving the claimant. The claimant sought disclosure of the documents created when the solicitors advised employees of the Bank in . .
CitedKyla Shipping Co Ltd and Another v Freight Trading Ltd and Others ComC 22-Feb-2022
Litigation Privilege
Defendants challenged the claimants assertion of litigation privilege and contended for a waiver of any privilege which entitles them to disclosure of additional materials referred to in a witness statement.
Held: ‘I dismiss the waiver of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Evidence

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.180870

United States of America v Philip Morris Inc and Others and British American Tobacco (Investments) Ltd: CA 23 Mar 2004

The defendants appealed orders requiring them to produce evidence for use in the courts in the US.
Held: It was the pleasure and duty of British courts to respond positively to a letter of request. Public interest required that a court should have before it all the evidence it required to fulfil its task. Unless it was clear that the majority of questions asked could be resisted on the grounds of legal professional privilege, the rquest should be complied with.

Judges:

Mr Justice Brooke Lord Justice Chadwick Lord Justice Scott Baker

Citations:

[2004] EWCA (Civ) 330, Times 16-Apr-2004, [2004] 1 CLC 811

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Evidence (Proceedings in other Jurisdictions) Act 1975

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedGenira Trade and Finance Inc v CS First Boston and Standard Bank (London) Limited CA 21-Nov-2001
The court considered the circumstances under which it could be called upon to assist a foreign court.
Held: It is the duty and pleasure of the court to give all such assistance as it can to the requesting court within the limits imposed by the . .
CitedThree Rivers District Council and others v The Governor and Co of the Bank of England (No 5) CA 3-Apr-2003
Documents had been prepared by the respondent to support a request for legal advice in anticipation of the Bingham enquiry into the collapse of BCCI.
Held: Legal advice privilege attached to the communications between a client and the . .
CitedThree Rivers District Council v Bank of England (No 5) ComC 4-Nov-2003
The defendant bank sought protection from disclosure of advice it had received from its solicitors.
Held: To the extent that the communications were for the purpose of seeking advice as to its legal rights and obligations, the communications . .
CitedBalabel v Air India CA 1988
When considering claims for legal professional privilege, the court should acknowledge the ‘continuity of communications’. However, where the traditional role of a solicitor had expanded, the scope of legal professional privilege should not be . .
Appeal fromUnited States of America v Philip Morris Inc and others QBD 10-Dec-2003
Witness orders were sought in respect of professionals resident in England to support litigation in the US. They objected on the ground that the terms of the order sought suggested improper behaviour, and that an order would anticipate breach of . .
CitedWaugh v British Railways Board HL 12-Jul-1979
No Litigation Privilege without Dominant Purpose
An internal report had been prepared by two of the Board’s officers two days after a collision involving the death of a locomotive driver, whose widow brought the action and now sought its production.
Held: The court considered litigation . .
CitedRe Highgrade Traders Ltd CA 1984
The court rejected a claim for legal advice privilege in relation to reports commissioned by an insurance company after a suspected arson. The documents were reports prepared by third parties rather than employees of the company. After considering a . .
CitedRegina v Derby Magistrates Court Ex Parte B HL 19-Oct-1995
No Breach of Solicitor Client Confidence Allowed
B was charged with the murder of a young girl. He made a confession to the police, but later changed his story, saying his stepfather had killed the girl. He was acquitted. The stepfather was then charged with the murder. At his committal for trial, . .
CitedIn Re L (A Minor) (Police Investigation: Privilege) HL 22-Mar-1996
A report obtained for Children Act proceedings has no privilege against use in evidence. Such proceedings are in the nature of inquisitorial proceedings. Litigation privilege was not applicable in care proceedings and a report prepared may be given . .
CitedAnderson v Bank of British Columbia CA 1876
Litigation was threatened against an English bank concerning the conduct of an account kept at the branch of the bank in Oregon. The English bank’s London manager thought it necessary to ascertain the full facts and cabled the branch manager in . .
CitedWheeler v Le Marchant CA 1881
Advice was given to the defendant trustee of the will of a Mr Brett in the course of its administration in the Chancery Division; for the purpose of that advice information was sought from both the former and the current estate-agent and surveyor. . .
CitedCollins v London General Omnibus Company 1893
The court adopted a narrow definition of when documents would be protected by legal professional privilege because of anticipated litigation. Will J postulating circumstances being such that ‘no reasonable person could doubt that an action would . .
CitedJarman v Lambert and Cooke Contractors Ltd CA 1951
The words ‘pending’ or ‘anticipated’ in the subsection were the words habitually used in connection with legal professional privilege, and ‘The privilege only obtains if litigation is ‘pending or anticipated’, and in that connection it is well . .
CitedRegina v Special Commissioner And Another, ex parte Morgan Grenfell and Co Ltd HL 16-May-2002
The inspector issued a notice requiring production of certain documents. The respondents refused to produce them, saying that they were protected by legal professional privilege.
Held: Legal professional privilege is a fundamental part of . .

Cited by:

CitedStarbev GP Ltd v Interbrew Central European Holding Bv ComC 18-Dec-2013
Challenge to assertion of litigation privilege.
Hamblen J said:
’11. The legal requirements of a claim to litigation privilege may be summarised as follows:
(1) The burden of proof is on the party claiming privilege to establish it . .
CitedKyla Shipping Co Ltd and Another v Freight Trading Ltd and Others ComC 22-Feb-2022
Litigation Privilege
Defendants challenged the claimants assertion of litigation privilege and contended for a waiver of any privilege which entitles them to disclosure of additional materials referred to in a witness statement.
Held: ‘I dismiss the waiver of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Legal Professions, Evidence

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.194836

Waugh v British Railways Board: HL 12 Jul 1979

No Litigation Privilege without Dominant Purpose

An internal report had been prepared by two of the Board’s officers two days after a collision involving the death of a locomotive driver, whose widow brought the action and now sought its production.
Held: The court considered litigation privilege. There is a conflict between the need to enable clients to communicate freely with their legal advisers in relation to litigation and the need to ensure that all relevant material is before the court. The report undoubtedly contained material collected by or on behalf of the Board for the use of their solicitors in anticipated litigation, but because it could not be shown that this was its dominant purpose the document did not attract litigation privilege.
Legal advice privilege has to be distinguished from litigation privilege. The need to make that distinction was sometimes overlooked: ‘It is for the party refusing disclosure to establish his right to refuse. It may well be that in some cases where that right has in the past been upheld the courts have failed to keep clear the distinction between (a) communications between client and legal adviser, and (b) communications between the client and third parties, made (as the Law Reform Committee put it) ‘for the purpose of obtaining information to be submitted to the client’s professional legal advisers for the purpose of obtaining advice upon pending or contemplated litigation.”
A ‘dominant purpose’ test was the best method of resolving the competing principles that on the one hand there should be full disclosure of relevant material in litigation, and on the other, there must be effective maintenance of legal professional privilege.

Judges:

Lord Simon, Lord Edmund Davies, Lord Wilberforce

Citations:

[1980] AC 521, [1979] UKHL 2, [1979] 3 WLR 150, [1979] 2 All ER 1169, [1979] UKHL TC – 53 – 185

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

ApprovedRe Highgrade Traders CA 1984
Litigation privilege may be claimed in respect of documents brought into being at a time when litigation is reasonably in prospect. . .
CitedUnited States of America v Philip Morris Inc and Others and British American Tobacco (Investments) Ltd CA 23-Mar-2004
The defendants appealed orders requiring them to produce evidence for use in the courts in the US.
Held: It was the pleasure and duty of British courts to respond positively to a letter of request. Public interest required that a court should . .
CitedRe Highgrade Traders Ltd CA 1984
The court rejected a claim for legal advice privilege in relation to reports commissioned by an insurance company after a suspected arson. The documents were reports prepared by third parties rather than employees of the company. After considering a . .
CitedThree Rivers District Council and others v Governor and Company of the Bank of England (No 6) HL 11-Nov-2004
The Bank anticipated criticism in an ad hoc enquiry which was called to investigate its handling of a matter involving the claimant. The claimant sought disclosure of the documents created when the solicitors advised employees of the Bank in . .
CitedWright v Sullivan CA 27-May-2005
The claimant had appointed a clinical case manager. She appealed an order requiring the case manager to report also to the court.
Held: The case manager’s duties were purely to the claimant, and an order requiring that manager to report also . .
CitedBritish Broadcasting Corporation v Sugar and Another Admn 2-Oct-2009
Disclosure was sought of a report prepared by the BBC to assess the balance of its coverage of middle east affairs. The BBC said that the information was not held for purposes other than those of journalism, art or literature. One issue was whether . .
DistinguishedSugar v The British Broadcasting Commission and Another (No 2) CA 23-Jun-2010
The respondent had had prepared a report as to the balance of its reporting of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Earlier proceedings had established that the purposes of the holding of the reporting included jurnalism. The claimant now appealed . .
CitedSugar v British Broadcasting Corporation and Another (2) SC 15-Feb-2012
The claimant sought release of a report prepared by the respondent as to its coverage of the Arab/Israel conflict partly for journalistic purposes, and partly for compliance.
Held: The appeal failed. Where the report was prepared even if only . .
CitedKyla Shipping Co Ltd and Another v Freight Trading Ltd and Others ComC 22-Feb-2022
Litigation Privilege
Defendants challenged the claimants assertion of litigation privilege and contended for a waiver of any privilege which entitles them to disclosure of additional materials referred to in a witness statement.
Held: ‘I dismiss the waiver of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Evidence

Leading Case

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.188693

Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd and Others: SC 20 Mar 2019

The claimant appellant alleged that properties she owned were transferred to the first defendant under undue influence or other unconscionable conduct by the second and third defendants. The claim was dismissed. Three years later she claimed to set that judgment aside having been obtained by fraud. To support the allegation she brought evidence not available at the first trial that the defendants had forged her signature on a document. The defendants requested its strike out as an abuse of process, saying that reasonable diligence would have obtained the fresh evidence before the original trial. The judge refused the application and allowed the claim to proceed to trial, holding that the reasonable diligence condition did not apply where a party sought to set aside a judgment on the grounds of fraud, and there had been no abuse of process. The CA allowed the defendants’ appeal, holding that reasonable diligence was required by the claimant.
Held: The appeal succeeded. A person who applies to set aside an earlier judgment on the basis of fraud does not have to demonstrate that the evidence of this fraud could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence in advance of the earlier trial.
Fraud as such had not been pleaded at the first trial, and therefore this was not a relitigation of the issues at that first trial, and the authorities on which the defendant relied did not go to a proposition that, in cases where it is alleged that a judgment was obtained by fraud, it may only be set aside where the party who makes that application can demonstrate that the fraud could not have been uncovered with reasonable diligence in advance of the judgment. The law does not expect people to arrange their affairs on the basis that others may commit fraud.
An action to set aside an earlier judgment for fraud is not a procedural application but a cause of action. This cause of action is independent of the cause of action asserted in the earlier proceedings and there can therefore be no question of cause of action estoppel. There is also no question of issue estoppel, because the basis of the action is that the earlier decision is vitiated by fraud and cannot bind the parties.

Judges:

Lord Kerr, Lord Sumption, Lord Hodge, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Briggs, Lady Arden, Lord Kitchin

Citations:

[2019] UKSC 13, [2019] 2 WLR 984, [2019] 3 All ER 283, [2019] WLR(D) 198, UKSC 2017/0072

Links:

Bailii, WLRD, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 2018 Oct 10 am Video, SC 2018 Oct 10 pm Video

Statutes:

Income Taxes Act 2007 132, Taxes Management Act 1970 9A Sch1A

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At first InstanceTakhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd and Others ChD 6-May-2015
The claimant alleged that the defendant had obtained its judgment in earlier proceedings by fraud. The defendant now applied for the claim to be dismissed as an abuse of process. . .
Appeal fromTakhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd and Others CA 21-Mar-2017
. .
CitedHip Foong Hong v H Neotia and Co PC 15-Jul-1918
An appellate Court has inherent power to set aside a judgment obtained through fraud. Lord Buckmaster described how an appellate court should deal with an allegation that an earlier judgment had been obtained by fraud: ‘Where a new trial is sought . .
CitedHunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police HL 19-Nov-1981
No collateral attack on Jury findigs.
An attempt was made to open up in a civil action, allegations of assaults by the police prior to the making of confessions which had been disposed of in a voir dire in the course of a criminal trial. The plaintiffs had imprisoned having spent many . .
CitedAshingdane v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-May-1985
The right of access to the courts is not absolute but may be subject to limitations. These are permitted by implication since the right of access ‘by its very nature calls for regulation by the State, regulation which may vary in time and place . .
CitedJohnson 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 . .
CitedVirgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Zodiac Seats UK Ltd SC 3-Jul-2013
Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd sought to recover damages exceeding 49,000,000 pounds for the infringement of a European Patent which did not exist in the form said to have been infringed. The Technical Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office had . .
CitedHIH Casualty and General Insurance Limited and others v Chase Manhattan Bank and others HL 20-Feb-2003
The insurance company had paid claims on policies used to underwrite the production of TV films. The re-insurers resisted the claims against them by the insurers on the grounds of non-disclosure by the insured, or in the alternative damages for . .
CitedKirby v the Owners of the Scindia (The ‘Marie Joseph’) PC 23-Jun-1866
A Bill of lading for the delivery of goods to order and assigns, is a negotiable instrument, which by indorsement and delivery passes the property in the goods to the indorsee, subject only to the right of the unpaid vendor to stop them in transitu. . .
CitedJonesco v Beard HL 1930
The plaintiff was a race horse trainer. He had made two claims against the defendant owner alleging first that the defendant had agreed to give him a share in some horses and second that the plaintiff had sold two horses to him but not been paid for . .
CitedLazarus Estates Ltd v Beasley CA 1956
There was a privative clause in the 1954 Act. A landlord’s declaration under the Act that work of a specified value, supporting an increase in rent, had been carried out on leased premises, could not be questioned after 28 days of its service on the . .
CitedClone Pty Ltd v Players Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) (Receivers and Managers Appointed) 21-Mar-2018
. .
CitedMcDonald v McDonald 13-Aug-1965
HCA – Appeal – New Trial – Fresh evidence – Tending to prove verdict obtained by fraud – Principles of grant of new trial on grounds of fraud and discovery of fresh evidence.
the High Court of Australia applied Hip Foong Hong and Jonesco v . .
CitedToubia v Schwenke 2002
Supreme Court of New South Wales – Court of Appeal
‘In an action for fraud, a plaintiff must prove that he was deceived but need not prove that he was diligent.’ Handley JA continued: ‘Where the action seeks the judicial rescission of a . .
CitedOwens Bank Ltd v Bracco and Another (No2) HL 17-Jun-1992
The bank had obtained judgment in St Vincent to recover a loan. It now sought to register the judgment here for enforcement. The defendant wanted to argue that the judgment had been obtained by fraud, and to resist registration of the judgment. The . .
CitedCallaghan v Hanson-Fox (Andrew) FD 1992
H sought to have set aside a decree absolute obtained on the petition of his now deceased wife on the ground of fraud, in that the petitioner had falsely sworn in her affidavit verifying the petition that the marriage had broken down irretrievably . .
CitedThe Ampthill Peerage Case HL 1977
There was a dispute about the legitimacy of an heir to the title. New evidence had been discovered after the trial.
Held: The House considered whether a new trial of an action might be ordered after discovery of new evidence: ‘The law knows, . .
CitedArnold v National Westminster Bank Plc HL 1991
Tenants invited the court to construe the terms of a rent review provision in the sub-underlease under which they held premises. The provision had been construed in a sense adverse to them in earlier proceedings before Walton J, but they had been . .
CitedGould v Vaggelas 1984
Brennan J said: ‘A knave does not escape liability because he is dealing with a fool.’ . .
CitedMcIlkenny v Chief Constable of the West Midlands CA 1980
The appellant had been convicted of an IRA bombing, causing loss of many lives. The appellant and his other co-accused alleged that their confessions had been induced by police violence. The trial judge ruled that their confessions were voluntary . .
CitedMontefiori v Montefiori 1746
A note, given fraudulently, to carry on a marriage treaty, shall be good against the drawer, though given without any consideration.
Lord Mansfield said: ‘no man shall set up his own iniquity as a defence, any more than as a cause of action’. . .
CitedBoswell v Coaks (No 2) 1894
An English judgment is impeachable in an English court on the ground that the first judgment was obtained by fraud but only by the production and establishment of evidence newly discovered since the trial and not reasonably discoverable before the . .
CitedRedgrave v Hurd CA 1881
The plaintiff, an elderly solicitor wishing to retire, advertised for someone to enter into partnership with him and to buy his house. The defendant responded to the advertisement and negotiations followed, in which the plaintiff stated that the . .
CitedPhosphate Sewage Co (Ltd) v Molleson (Peter Lawson and Son’s Trustee) HL 8-Jul-1879
Res judicata – Competent and Omitted – Case of a Claimant in a Sequestration making a Second Claim.
Averments in two successive claims in a sequestration in consequence of which – affirming judgment of Court of Session – the plea of res . .
CitedHenderson v Henderson 20-Jul-1843
Abuse of Process and Re-litigation
The court set down the principles to be applied in abuse of process cases, where a matter was raised again which should have been dealt with in earlier proceedings.
Sir James Wigram VC said: ‘In trying this question I believe I state the rule . .
CitedFlower v Lloyd CA 11-Jun-1877
The plaintiffs tried to restrain the defendant from infringing their patent. They succeeded at first instance but the order was overturned on appeal. An expert went to inspect the process at the defendant’s works. Later, employees gave affidavits . .

Cited by:

See AlsoTakhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd and Others ChD 23-Oct-2020
The Claimant seeks to set aside a judgment obtained against her by the Defendants in 2010 in an earlier action – allegation that new evidence of forgery of signature. . .
See AlsoTakhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd and Others (Consequential Orders) ChD 11-Nov-2020
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Undue Influence, Evidence

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.634789

Crawford v Financial Institutions Services Ltd: PC 2 Nov 2005

(Jamaica) The government had intervened in banking institutions under the control of the appellant. Subsequently orders had been made against him for compensation in respect of loans made negligently or otherwise than in accordance with good banking practice. He appealed those orders.
Held: The appeal failed. He had not been accused of fraud, and his failure to gve evidence had led to proper inferences being drawn against him.

Judges:

Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Lord Mance

Citations:

[2005] UKPC 40

Links:

Bailii, PC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedNocton v Lord Ashburton HL 19-Jun-1914
The defendant solicitor had persuaded his client to release a charge, thus advancing the solicitor’s own subsequent charge on the same property. The action was started in the Chancery Division of the High Court. The statement of claim alleged fraud . .
See AlsoCentury National Merchant Bank Limited and others v Omar Davies and others PC 16-Mar-1998
(Jamaica) The lawfulness of action taken by the Minister of Finance under statutory powers to assume temporary management of three financial institutions was challenged, and the remedies available to aggrieved parties in the event of unlawfulness. . .
CitedArmitage v Nurse; etc CA 19-Mar-1997
A clause in a trust deed may validly excuse trustees from personal liability for even gross negligence. The trustee was exempted from liability for loss or damage ‘unless such loss or damage shall be caused by his own actual fraud’.
Held: The . .
CitedJones v Lipman and Another ChD 1962
The defendant had contracted to sell his land. He changed his mind, and formed a company of which he was owner and director, transferred the land to the company, and refused to complete. The plaintiff sought relief.
Held: Specific performance . .
CitedBritish Railways Board v Herrington HL 16-Feb-1972
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Evidence

Updated: 11 February 2022; Ref: scu.235359

Regina v Best: CCA 1909

Referring to the admissibility of answers to questions put before an arrest, ‘it is quite impossible to say that the fact that a question of this kind has been asked invalidates the trial’.

Judges:

Channell, J

Citations:

(1909) 1 KBD 692

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

DoubtedRegina v Gavin 1888
The court excluded a statement made to a constable, who questioned his prisoner in a way that amounted to cross-examination. A constable has no right to ask questions without expressly saying that the answers cannot be relevant evidence. . .

Cited by:

CitedIbrahim v The King PC 6-Mar-1914
(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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Evidence

Updated: 09 February 2022; Ref: scu.184198

Regina v Sonni Lee Reid and Others: CACD 31 Jul 2001

The six defendants had been convicted of murder. They had been involved in a mugging where both victims had been assaulted, and thrown from a bridge into the river. Only one survived. They applied a second time for leave to appeal against conviction. A medical report on one defendant had been disclosed in error, but was then admitted, but no prejudice was found. The practice of the prosecution of routinely obtaining psychiatric reports, which were not privileged, in murder cases is to be deprecated. Another defendant alleged she had been present only as a passive witness, but it was held that the extent of her involvement had been left properly with the jury. Leave was refused.

Judges:

Lord Justice Rose, Mr Justice Bell, Mr Justice Stanley Burton

Citations:

Unreported, 31 July 2001

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Central Criminal Court ex parte Porter 1992
. .
CitedRegina v Shahid, Miah, Uddin CACD 12-May-1998
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 01 February 2022; Ref: scu.159887

Elliott v Ratcliffe: FD 1 Feb 2013

The claimant sought a declaration of parentage in respect of a child under the 1986 Act, saying that he was not the father. Directions were given for a company to take samples, but instead the company requested the various parties to attend their own doctors for the samples to be taken. The parties disputed the validity of the chain of custody of the samples.
Held: The service may be adequate when parties wish to undertake private checks of paternity, but that was not what the court had ordered. The case would require adjournment for further evidence.

Holman J
[2013] EWHC 806 (Fam)
Bailii
Family Law Act 1986 55A
England and Wales

Children, Evidence

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.472577

Couwenbergh v Valkova: CA 27 May 2004

The deceased’s family lived in Europe. The defendant had moved in as tenant and had become confidante and friend over many years. A will had been prepared leaving everything to the defendant. That will had been challenged alleging incorrect execution. At a first trial, the claimant failed. After a much later investigation by the police, new evidence challenged the execution in front of witnesses.
Held: As a second request, the claimant had to satisfy the test in Taylor v Lawrence. The new evidence might be credible and should be admitted, but there was a real possibility that a new trial would not be effective. Nevertheless, an appeal would be allowed to go ahead. The parties were reminded of the effect on costs of a refusal to consider mediation.

Lord Justice Waller Lord Justice Ward
[2004] EWCA Civ 676
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedTaylor v Lawrence CA 4-Feb-2002
A party sought to re-open a judgment on the Court of Appeal after it had been perfected. A case had been tried before a judge. One party had asked for a different judge to be appointed, after the judge disclosed that he had been a client of the firm . .
CitedLadd v Marshall CA 29-Nov-1954
Conditions for new evidence on appeal
At the trial, the wife of the appellant’s opponent said she had forgotten certain events. After the trial she began divorce proceedings, and informed the appellant that she now remembered. He sought either to appeal admitting fresh evidence, or for . .
CitedHip Foong Hong v H Neotia and Co PC 15-Jul-1918
An appellate Court has inherent power to set aside a judgment obtained through fraud. Lord Buckmaster described how an appellate court should deal with an allegation that an earlier judgment had been obtained by fraud: ‘Where a new trial is sought . .
CitedHamilton v Al Fayed (2) CA 13-Oct-2000
A third party who financially supported a court action had no right to be joined as a party even at hearings at which decisions would be made which might affect his potential liabilities. Those who financially support proceedings must acknowledge . .
CitedJonesco v Beard HL 1930
The plaintiff was a race horse trainer. He had made two claims against the defendant owner alleging first that the defendant had agreed to give him a share in some horses and second that the plaintiff had sold two horses to him but not been paid for . .
CitedFlower v Lloyd CA 11-Jun-1877
The plaintiffs tried to restrain the defendant from infringing their patent. They succeeded at first instance but the order was overturned on appeal. An expert went to inspect the process at the defendant’s works. Later, employees gave affidavits . .
CitedSohal v Sohal CA 30-Jul-2002
It was alleged that a verdict upholding a will had been obtained by fraud. Permission was sought to appeal.
Held: It is possible to seek to establish that a judgment was obtained by fraud by adducing fresh evidence on an appeal: ‘There is no . .
CitedThe Ampthill Peerage Case HL 1977
There was a dispute about the legitimacy of an heir to the title. New evidence had been discovered after the trial.
Held: The House considered whether a new trial of an action might be ordered after discovery of new evidence: ‘The law knows, . .
CitedHalsey v Milton Keynes General NHS Trust etc CA 11-May-2004
The court considered the effect on costs orders of a refusal to take part in alternate dispute resolution procedures. The defendant Trust had refused to take the dispute to a mediation. In neither case had the court ordered or recommended ADR.
Cited by:
See AlsoCouwenbergh v Valkova CA 28-Jan-2005
The will was challenged as to its due execution. Statements had been produced that the two witnesses had not been present when the will was signed, but those witnesses now said that they and not signed the statements.
Held: The evidence met . .
See AlsoCouwenbergh v Valkova ChD 16-Oct-2008
Challenge to admission of will to probate.
Held: The presumption of due attestation of a will had not been rebutted. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate, Evidence

Updated: 21 January 2022; Ref: scu.197941

Regina v Governor of Pentonville Prison, Ex Parte Osman: QBD 30 Mar 1988

The applicant had been committed to prison pending extradition proceedings brought by Hong Kong alleging substantial fraud. He challenged the committal on the grounds that since the allegations involved transmission of funds over international borders, if he had committed the acts alleged in the UK an offence would not have been committed, since the funds were transmitted from abroad, and the offences were extra-territorial.
Held: The act of appropriation occurred when the defendant assumed the rights of an owner. His sending of the telex was the last act he needed to do, and that would not be extra territorial. The evidence required was that upon which a properly directed jury could commit. Last, the procedure under the 1967 Act was to be similar to that in the 1870 Act. Accordingly the list of offences could be phrased in general terms, and was capable of amendment. As regards evidence from computer printouts, the provisions of subsection 2 were alternatives, and not cumulative, since section 68(1)(b) required any one of them to be present. If there was no internal evidence of malfunction, such a printout should be admitted under section 69. Once documents which may have had legal professional privilege had been produced that did not affect their later admission. Police powers of arrest and search were the same on a domestic crime as under the 1967 Act.
Lloyd LJ observed: ‘The practice in extradition cases has been that the English ‘offences’ are stated in the authority to proceed in very general terms. The magistrate is not, of course, concerned with whether the offence is made out in foreign law. He is concerned solely with whether the evidence would support committal for trial in England, if the conduct complained of had taken place in England: see In re Nielsen [1984] AC 606. So the magistrate is furnished at the commencement of the hearing with a schedule of charges based on the alleged conduct and formulated in accordance with English law. The schedule of charges is frequently amended in the course of the hearing.’

Lloyd LJ and French J
[1990] 1 WLR 277
Fugitive Offenders Act 1967 5 7(5) 8, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 68(1)(2), Theft Act 1968 (c. 60) 3(1), Extradition Act 1870
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v Morris (David); Anderton v Burnside HL 2-Jan-1983
The defendants had been accused of theft. One switched labels on a joint of pork in a supermarket, and the other presented the meat with the now cheaper label for purchase.
Held: The appeals were dismissed. There can be no conviction for theft . .
CitedRegina v Navvabi CACD 1986
. .
CitedChan Man-sin v The Queen PC 1988
. .
AppliedAssociated 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 . .
DistinguishedRegina v Governor of Pentonville Prison, Ex parte Tarling HL 1978
The Government of Singapore sought Mr Tarling’s extradition inter alia on two charges of conspiring in Hong Kong to steal shares in a Hong Kong company, the property of a Singapore Company.
Held: a conspiracy in Hong Kong to steal shares in a . .
CitedRegina v Governor of Brixton Prison, Ex parte Gardner QBD 1968
A person was not eligible for surrender to New Zealand, the requesting country, because the offences with which he was charged in New Zealand involved the obtaining of property by knowingly false representations as to future conduct. English . .
CitedCalcraft v Guest CA 1898
A trial had taken place in which the principal issue was the upper boundary of the plaintiff’s fishery. On appeal the defendant proposed to rely on new evidence discovered among the papers in another action tried over a hundred years before. The . .
CitedKajala v Noble CACD 1982
The best evidence rule does not generally exclude the admission of evidence of lesser quality. If such a rule exists, it applies only to documents in the possession of the party
Ackner LJ said: ‘The old rule, that a party must produce the best . .

Cited by:
ConsideredRegina (Michael Rottman) v Commissioner of Police for Metropolis and Secretary of State for Home Department Admn 24-Jul-2001
There is no residual common law power of entry for police to enter into premises to execute a search without first obtaining a warrant, beyond that contained in the Act. The Act was intended to provide a complete statement of the powers of entry for . .
CitedMasquerade Music Ltd and Others v Bruce Springsteen CA 10-Apr-2001
The respondent was a composer who sought to restrict the import of CDs containing his music into the UK. The appellants responded putting him to strict proof of his title. The title included assignments from a partnership to limited companies, but . .
CitedRegina v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis, ex parte Rottman HL 16-May-2002
The defendant had been arrested under an extradition warrant issued under the Act. The police had searched his premises, and found further evidence which was used to support the application for extradition. He challenged the collection and admission . .
CitedHolmes v Governor of Brixton Prison and Another Admn 20-Aug-2004
The applicant sought his release from imprisonment where he awaited extradition to Germany. He was suspected of an offence of deception. He said there was insufficient evidence that the offence alleged would be an offence here. The alleged offence . .
CitedGomes v Trinidad and Tobago HL 29-Apr-2009
Each appellant challenged orders for their extradition, saying that the delay had been too prolonged, and that detention in Trinidad’s appalling jails would be an infringement of their human rights.
Held: The House had to consider its own . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Extradition, Evidence, Extradition, Police

Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.175510

Ventouris v Mountain: CA 1991

It is in the interests of the state which provides the court system and its judges at taxpayers’ expense that legal advisers should be able to encourage strong cases and discourage weak cases. ‘It is the protection of confidential communications between client and legal adviser which lies at the heart of legal professional privilege.’ That requirement was supported by legal professional privilege, but privilege does not attach to a document obtained by a party or his adviser for the purpose of litigation if the document did not come into existence for that purpose. ‘The ratio of the decision [in Lyell v. Kennedy] is, I think, that where the collection of documents which a solicitor has copied or assembled betrays the trend of the advice which he is giving the client the documents are privileged.’ The Oregon manager’s letter in Anderson v Bank of British Columbia would be regarded as privileged as a letter written for the purpose of laying before a solicitor in order to obtain legal advice.
Bingham LJ said: ‘The expression ‘legal professional privilege’ is unhappy, because it falsely suggests a privilege enjoyed by the legal profession when in truth it is not the legal profession but the client who enjoys the privilege. It also suggests, surely wrongly, that a litigant in person is denied in preparing his litigation, the protection of secrecy which is enjoyed by a litigant who instructs a lawyer. The expression ‘litigation privilege,’ which has also and perhaps increasingly been used, avoids that objection but is itself open to the objection that it suggests a privilege pertaining to litigation, whereas it is clear that the privilege covers communications between the client and his agent and his professional legal adviser even when no litigation is pending or contemplated.’
He also said: ‘The doctrine of legal professional privilege is rooted in the public interest, which requires that hopeless and exaggerated claims and unsound and spurious defences be so far as possible discouraged, and civil disputes so far as possible settled without resort to judicial decision. To this end it is necessary that actual and potential litigants, be they claimants or respondents, should be free to unburden themselves without reserve to their legal advisers, and their legal advisers be free to give honest and candid advice on a sound factual basis, without fear that these communications may be relied on by an opposing party if the dispute comes before the court for decision. It is the protection of confidential communications between client and legal adviser which lies at the heart of legal professional privilege . . ‘

Bingham LJ
[1991] 1 WLR 607, [1991] 3 All ER 472
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedLyell v Kennedy (No 3) CA 8-Apr-1884
The plaintiff claimed to be entitled to land as purchaser from the heir-at-law of an intestate, who had died many years earlier. The land was in the possession of the defendant, and the central issue in the action was whether the defendant’s . .
CitedAnderson v Bank of British Columbia CA 1876
Litigation was threatened against an English bank concerning the conduct of an account kept at the branch of the bank in Oregon. The English bank’s London manager thought it necessary to ascertain the full facts and cabled the branch manager in . .

Cited by:
CitedBrown and Another v Bennett and Others (No 3) ChD 17-Dec-2001
When a barrister was the subject of an application for a wasted costs order, it was proper to require him to disclose which non-privileged documents he had had sight of, provided that the request was not a way of trying to discover what was in . .
CitedThree Rivers District Council and others v The Governor and Co of the Bank of England (No 5) CA 3-Apr-2003
Documents had been prepared by the respondent to support a request for legal advice in anticipation of the Bingham enquiry into the collapse of BCCI.
Held: Legal advice privilege attached to the communications between a client and the . .
CitedSumitomo Corporation v Credit Lyonnais Rouse Limited CA 20-Jul-2001
Documents had been translated from the Japanese, for the purposes of the litigation. The claimant refused disclosure, arguing that they were privileged, and protected from disclosure, having been prepared for the court proceedings.
Held: The . .
CitedThree Rivers District Council and others v Governor and Company of the Bank of England (No 6) HL 11-Nov-2004
The Bank anticipated criticism in an ad hoc enquiry which was called to investigate its handling of a matter involving the claimant. The claimant sought disclosure of the documents created when the solicitors advised employees of the Bank in . .
CitedTeal Assurance Company Ltd v WR Berkley Insurance (Europe) Ltd SC 31-Jul-2013
An international engineering company had several layers of professional indemnity insurance. The top later did not cover claims originating in the US or Canada. The several insurers now disputed apportionment of liability between them. The . .
CitedX v Y Ltd (Practice and Procedure – Disclosure) EAT 9-Aug-2018
Iniquity surpasses legal advice privilege
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Disclosure
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Striking-out/dismissal
An Employment Judge struck out paragraphs of the Claimant’s claim as they depended on an email in respect of which legal advice privilege was claimed. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Litigation Practice, Evidence

Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.180869

Lyell v Kennedy (No 3): CA 8 Apr 1884

The plaintiff claimed to be entitled to land as purchaser from the heir-at-law of an intestate, who had died many years earlier. The land was in the possession of the defendant, and the central issue in the action was whether the defendant’s possession barred the plaintiff’s claim. This in turn raised issues as to the intestate’s pedigree and as to the heirship to her estate. In the course of preparing the defendant’s defence in the action, his solicitors had obtained copies of and extracts from certain entries in public registers, together with photographs of certain tombstones and houses. By his affidavit of documents the defendant objected to produce these documents on the ground firstly that they had come into existence for the purpose of the litigation, and secondly: ‘that for the purpose of his defence . . he had through his solicitors to obtain the assistance of counsel, and for that purpose to make searches and inquiries, and obtain copies of entries in registers, public records, and other original documents, not in his possession, and that his solicitors employed confidential clerks, and confidential agents, and his solicitors and their clerks and agents in the course of such employment and for the purposes aforesaid, made and obtained the copies, and procured the photographs’. The plaintiff sought disclosure, contending that the documents in question were unprivileged. Opposing disclosure, the defendant argued that: ‘…. the discretion exercised by the solicitor …. in the choice of a series of extracts and copies, records and registers, and the omission of others, prevents it being a mere servile copying of public documents, which would not be privileged, but that it represents the work of the solicitor’s mind, and might be a means of showing to the Plaintiff the idea entertained by him of his client’s case.’
Held: As to privilege: ‘What ought we to do here? Here is a litigation about pedigree and the heirship to a lady who died many years ago; and it is sworn by the Defendant that for the purpose of defending himself against various claimants he has made inquiries, and that he has obtained every one of those documents for the purpose of protecting himself, and that he has got them, not himself personally, but that his solicitors have got them, for the purpose of his defence, for the purpose of instructing his counsel, and for the purpose of conducting this litigation on his behalf. Now no case has been quoted where documents obtained under such circumstances have been ordered to be produced. In my opinion it is contrary to the principle on which the court acts with regard to protection on the ground of professional privilege that we should make an order for their production; they were obtained for the purpose of his defence, and it would be to deprive a solicitor of the means afforded for enabling him to fully investigate a case for the purpose of instructing counsel if we required documents, although perhaps publici juris in themselves, to be produced, because the very fact of the solicitor having got copies of certain burial certificates and other records, and having made copies of the inscriptions on certain tombstones, and obtained photographs of certain houses, might shew what his view was as to the case of his client as regards the claim made against him. There is no case, as I have said before, which is exactly in point, but Walsham v. Stainton, though different in its circumstances, somewhat illustrates the principle to which I am referring, because there, when that case came before Vice-Chancellor Wood, he protected the records and extracts from books which had been made by an accountant for the defendants, who had collected together a number of entries, because the extracts, when put together, shewed the view which he and the solicitor of the defendants took of the particular fraud which they were there investigating, and the Judge considered that to order the defendants to produce them would be not only giving production to the parties who were asking for production, but giving them a clue to the advice which had been given by the solicitor, and giving them the benefit of the professional opinion which had been formed by the solicitor and those who had acted in a professional capacity for the defendant. In my opinion, therefore, in this case, without saying what ought to be done if there were any different case made before the Court with regard to documents like these, it would not be in accordance with the rules which have guided this Court in deciding what is professional privilege in regard to the production of documents, to order their production.’

Cotton LJ, Bowen LJ
(1884) 27 ChD 1, [1884] UKLawRpCh 102
Commonlii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedSumitomo Corporation v Credit Lyonnais Rouse Limited CA 20-Jul-2001
Documents had been translated from the Japanese, for the purposes of the litigation. The claimant refused disclosure, arguing that they were privileged, and protected from disclosure, having been prepared for the court proceedings.
Held: The . .
CitedBrown and Another v Bennett and Others (No 3) ChD 17-Dec-2001
When a barrister was the subject of an application for a wasted costs order, it was proper to require him to disclose which non-privileged documents he had had sight of, provided that the request was not a way of trying to discover what was in . .
CitedVentouris v Mountain CA 1991
It is in the interests of the state which provides the court system and its judges at taxpayers’ expense that legal advisers should be able to encourage strong cases and discourage weak cases. ‘It is the protection of confidential communications . .
CitedDubai Bank Ltd v Galadari (No 7) ChD 1992
The court approved the proposition that the starting point for the court in addressing the selection of documents for discovery is that the court should accept a solicitor’s affidavit claiming privilege as conclusive ‘unless it can be seen . .
See AlsoLyell v Kennedy HL 1-Aug-1889
The true owner may recover money which was rightfully his from a person to whom the money in question had been wrongly paid by the collector of the money. A fiduciary is one who has undertaken, whether on request or without request, of his own . .
CitedImerman v Tchenguiz and Others QBD 16-Nov-2009
The claimant sought an ‘unless order’, saying that the defendant had failed to comply with orders for delivery up of documents. Though the order had been agreed, the defendants said that the documents might be needed for an appeal. The claimants . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Legal Professions

Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.180911

KV (Scarring – Medical Evidence): UTIAC 23 May 2014

UTIAC 1. When preparing medico-legal reports doctors should not – and should not feel obliged to – reach conclusions about causation of scarring which go beyond their own clinical expertise.
2. Doctors preparing medico-legal reports for asylum seekers must consider all possible causes of scarring.
3. Where there is a presenting feature of the case that raises self-infliction by proxy (SIBP) as a more than fanciful possibility of the explanation for scarring:-
(i) a medical report adduced on behalf of a claimant will be expected to engage with that issue; it cannot eliminate a priori or routinely the possibility of SIBP; and
(ii) a judicial fact-finder will be expected to address the matter, compatibly with procedural fairness, in deciding whether, on all the evidence, the claimant has discharged the burden of proving that he or she was reasonably likely to have been scarred by torturers against his or her will.
4. A lack of correlation between a claimant’s account and what is revealed by a medical examination of the scarring may enable a medico-legal report to shed some clinical light on the issue of whether SIBP is a real possibility.
5. Whilst the medical literature continues to consider that scarring cannot be dated beyond 6 months from when it was inflicted, there is some medical basis for considering in relation to certain types of cases that its age can be determined up to 2 years.
6. Whilst if best practice is followed medico-legal reports will make a critical evaluation of a claimant’s account of scarring said to have been caused by torture, such reports cannot be equated with an assessment to be undertaken by decision-makers in a legal context in which the burden of proof rests on the claimant and when one of the purposes of questioning is to test a claimant’s evidence so as to decide whether (to the lower standard) it is credible.

Storey, Dawson, Kopieczek UTJJ
[2014] UKUT 230 (IAC)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal FromKV (Sri Lanka) v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 7-Mar-2017
The appellant sought asylum, claiming that he had been tortured as an ally of the Tamil Tigers. His claims had been disbelieved. . .
At UTKV (Sri Lanka) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 6-Mar-2019
The claimant said that he had been tortured in Sri Lanka. The SSHD said the injuries were falsifications, inflicted at the claimant’s request.
Held: KV’s appeal succeeded, and the case was remitted for a fresh determination. The Istanbul . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Evidence

Updated: 16 January 2022; Ref: scu.534244

Kennedy v Cordia (Services) Llp: SC 10 Feb 2016

The appellant care worker fell in snow when visiting the respondent’s client at home. At issue was the admission and status of expert or skilled evidence.
Held: Mrs Kennedy’s appeal succeeded. ‘There are in our view four considerations which govern the admissibility of skilled evidence:
(i) whether the proposed skilled evidence will assist the court in its task;
(ii) whether the witness has the necessary knowledge and experience;
(iii) whether the witness is impartial in his or her presentation and assessment of the evidence; and
(iv) whether there is a reliable body of knowledge or experience to underpin the expert’s evidence.’

Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Wilson, Lord Reed, Lord Toulson, Lord Hodge
[2016] UKSC 6, [2016] WLR(D) 74, [2016] PIQR P9, 2016 GWD 4-97, 2016 SCLR 203, (2016) 149 BMLR 17, [2016] ICR 325, 2016 SLT 209, [2016] 1 WLR 597, 2016 SC (UKSC) 59, UKSC 2014/0247
Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC summary
Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992, Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999
Scotland
Citing:
CitedGibson v Pollock 1848
The court admitted evidence of practice in dog coursing to determine whether the owner or nominator of a dog was entitled to a prize on its success. . .
CitedMorton v William Dixon Ltd IHCS 19-Mar-1909
Lord President Dunedin set out the liability of an employer: ‘Where the negligence of the employer consists of what I may call a fault of omission, I think it is absolutely necessary that the proof of that fault of omission should be one of two . .
CitedRegina v Bonython 1984
(South Australia Supreme Court) The court considered the basis for deciding whether a proposed witness was an expert.
Held: It is for the judge to determine whether a witness is competent to give evidence as an expert and for that purpose . .
CitedCaparo Industries Plc v Dickman and others HL 8-Feb-1990
Limitation of Loss from Negligent Mis-statement
The plaintiffs sought damages from accountants for negligence. They had acquired shares in a target company and, relying upon the published and audited accounts which overstated the company’s earnings, they purchased further shares.
Held: The . .
At Outer HouseKennedy v Cordia (Services) Llp SCS 7-Aug-2013
Outer House – damages after carer’s fall in snow.
Held: The Outer House found Cordia liable under the PPE Regulations, the Management Regulations, and the common law. Both risk assessments for Cordia had been faulty.
Lord McEwan . .
ApprovedMyers v The Queen PC 6-Oct-2015
Bermuda – three appeals against conviction raising similar, although not identical, questions concerning the admissibility and proper ambit of evidence as to the existence and practices of gangs and the defendant’s connections with them.
Held: . .
CitedKennedy v Cordia (Services) Llp SCS 19-Sep-2014
The respondent, Mrs Kennedy was working for the reclaimers as a carer. She had been injured walking up a snowy client’s path. The reclaimer appealed against an award for damages after a finding that she should have been provided with grips for her . .
CitedDavie v Magistrates of Edinburgh 1953
Issues arose in relation to the expert evidence which had been led.
Held: The court rejected a submission that, where no counter evidence on the science in question had been adduced for the pursuer, the Court was bound to accept the . .
CitedRegina v Turner (Terence) CACD 1974
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder. He admitted that he had killed his girlfriend with a hammer, but sought to bring psychiatric evidence that he was susceptible to provocation.
Held: The law jealously guards the role of . .
CitedCoopers (South Africa) (Pty) Ltd v Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Schadlingsbekampfung mbH 1976
(Supreme Court of South Africa (Appellate Division)) Wessels JA said: ‘[A]n expert’s opinion represents his reasoned conclusion based on certain facts or data, which are either common cause, or established by his own evidence or that of some other . .
CitedDaubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc 28-Jun-1993
United States Supreme Court – The court considered the Federal Rules of Evidence in the use of expert or skilled evidence: ‘If scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to . .
CitedDingley v The Chief Constable, Strathclyde Police 1998
The court was asked whether the development of multiple sclerosis had been caused by physical injury sustained in a motor accident. Medical science was not able to demonstrate the connection between the two, and reliance was placed on . .
CitedField and Another v Leeds City Council CA 8-Dec-1999
The parties were involved in a dispute as to repairs on a tenanted property. The court had ordered an independent surveyor’s report. The claimant objected to the use by the defendant of an employee for this purpose, and was involved in their claims . .
CitedToth v Jarman CA 19-Jul-2006
The claimant appealed dismissal of his claim for damages for nervous shock, associated with the alleged negligence of the defendant doctor in treating his son. It was said that the medical expert had not disclosed a conflict of interest.
Held: . .
CitedPora v Regina PC 3-Mar-2015
Court of Appeal of New Zealand – the defendant appealed against his conviction (after two trials) for rape and murder. He said that hos confession should not have been admitted, being unreliable, and that evidence should have been admitted that . .
CitedNational Justice Compania Naviera S A v Prudential Assurance Company Ltd (‘The Ikarian Reefer’) 1993
Cresswell J spoke of the nature of the duty owed by expert witnesses: ‘The duties and responsibilities of expert witnesses in civil cases include the following:

1. Expert evidence presented to the Court should be, and should be seen to be, the . .
CitedMearns v Smedvig Limited and others SCS 25-Nov-1998
‘A party seeking to lead a witness with purported knowledge or experience outwith generally recognised fields would need to set up by investigation and evidence not only the qualifications and expertise of the individual skilled witness, but the . .
CitedMain v McAndrew Wormald Ltd 1988
. .
CitedRegina v Gilfoyle CACD 20-Dec-2000
The evidence of a psychological autopsy was not admissible in court proceedings. The field was not one with sufficiently established evidence of value and standards to allow it properly to be assessed. If it were allowed on behalf of the defence in . .
CitedMcTear v Imperial Tobacco Ltd OHCS 31-May-2005
The pursuer sought damages after her husband’s death from lung cancer. She said that the defenders were negligent in having continued to sell him cigarettes knowing that they would cause this.
Held: The action failed. The plaintiff had not . .
CitedYoung v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 15-Nov-2013
The Court refused to admit evidence of ‘case linkage analysis’ because it was the subject of only relatively recent academic research and a methodology which was not yet sufficiently developed that it could be treated as reliable. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health and Safety, Personal Injury, Evidence

Updated: 10 January 2022; Ref: scu.560126

Bostock v Bostock: FD 2 Dec 1949

H petitioned for divorce, alleging desertion. W denied the allegation , but cross petitioned on the same basis. He sought to bring in evidence the contents of a discussion between H and W and their respective solicitors.
Held: The evidence was admissible (though the judge applying that evidence found for W).
Although a meeting between the parties to a matrimonial dispute in the presence of a probation officer must be taken to be without prejudice when that meeting has been arranged for the purpose of attempting to effect a reconciliation, an interview between the parties and their respective solicitors with a similar purpose in view is not to be taken to be without prejudice if it is not specifically stated so to be; and evidence of what occurred at such a meeting may accordingly be given notwithstanding objection by one of the parties

Ormerod J
[1950] 1 All ER 25, [1950] P 154, 114 JP 59, 66 TLR 339, 48 LGR 423
England and Wales

Family, Evidence

Updated: 07 January 2022; Ref: scu.670952

Shirley v Jacobs: 4 Jun 1835

Payments to Plaintiff, although not pleaded by Defendant, may be received in evidence in reduction of damages.

[1835] EngR 770, (1835) 2 Bing NC 88, (1835) 132 ER 35
Commonlii
England and Wales

Evidence

Updated: 06 January 2022; Ref: scu.316278

Regina v Isleworth Crown Court ex parte Marland: Admn 28 Oct 1997

A previous conviction of the defendant for a drugs related offence was admissible on a civil application for the forfeiture of cash said to represent the proceeds of drug trafficking under the section 43(1). The court observed that the circumstances in which similar fact evidence would be admitted in a criminal trial were closely circumscribed for the protection of the accused. In civil cases, on the other hand, the rules were less circumscribed because the underlying intention was not to protect one side but to be fair to both sides.

Kennedy LJ and Smith J
[1997] EWHC Admin 931
Drug Trafficking Act 1994 43(1)
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedO’Brien v Chief Constable of the South Wales Police CA 23-Jul-2003
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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence

Updated: 03 January 2022; Ref: scu.137876

Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 1): SC 19 Jun 2013

Closed Material before Supreme Court

Under the 2009 order, the appellant Bank had been effectively shut down as to its operations within the UK. It sought to use the appeal procedure, and now objected to the use of closed material procedure. The Supreme Court asked itself whether it was possible for the Supreme Court to use any such procedure, and if so, how and whether such a procedure should be adopted in this case.
Held: (Majority, Hope, Kerr and Reed LL dissenting) It was possible for the Supreme Court to adopt a closed material procedure on an appeal, and that it was appropriate for such a procedure in this case. The fact that any case might be appealed to the Supreme court implied that it could hear a case based in part on material not disclosed to all parties.
Lord Neuberger PJSC described the principle of open justice as ‘fundamental to the dispensation of justice in a modern, democratic society’ . . ‘However, it has long been accepted that, in rare cases, a court has inherent power to receive evidence and argument in a hearing from which the public and the press are excluded, and that it can even give a judgment which is only available to the parties. Such a course may only be taken (i) if it is strictly necessary to have a private hearing in order to achieve justice between the parties, and, (ii) if the degree of privacy is kept to an absolute minimum – see, for instance A v Independent News and Media Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 343, [2010] 1 WLR 2262, and JIH v News Group Newspapers Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 42, [2011] 1 WLR 1645. Examples of such cases include litigation where children are involved, where threatened breaches of privacy are being alleged, and where commercially valuable secret information is in issue.’

Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Hope, Deputy President, Lady Hale, Lord Kerr, Lord Clarke, Lord Dyson, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath
[2013] UKSC 38, UKSC 2011/0040, [2013] WLR(D) 244, [2014] AC 700, [2013] 4 All ER 495, [2013] 3 WLR 179, [2013] Lloyds Rep FC 580
Bailii, SC Summary, SC, WLRD, Bailii Summary
Financial Restrictions (Iran) Order 2009, Counter-Terrorism Act 2008, Constitutional Reform Act 2005 40(2)
England and Wales
Citing:
At first instanceBank Mellat v HM Treasury QBD 11-Jun-2010
The respondent had made an order under the Regulations restricting all persons from dealing with the the claimant bank. The bank applied to have the order set aside. Though the defendant originally believed that the Iranian government owned 80% of . .
Appeal fromBank Mellat v HM Treasury CA 13-Jan-2011
Under the 2009 Order, the appellant Bank’s UK operations had been shut down. It appealed against the Order, but the respondent had brought evidence, closed save to the respondent, and the order had been confirmed.
Held: The bank’s appeal . .
CitedRe D (Minors) (Adoption Reports: Confidentiality) HL 1-Sep-1995
The House considered whether it was right for a tribunal to see and rely upon papers not disclosed to the parties. Lord Mustill said: ‘a first principle of fairness that each party to a judicial process shall have an opportunity to answer by . .
CitedChahal v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Nov-1996
Proper Reply Opportunity Required on Deportation
(Grand Chamber) The claimant was an Indian citizen who had been granted indefinite leave to remain in this country but whose activities as a Sikh separatist brought him to the notice of the authorities both in India and here. The Home Secretary of . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Pierson HL 24-Jul-1997
The Home Secretary may not later extend the tariff for a lifer, after it had been set by an earlier Home Secretary, merely to satisfy needs of retribution and deterrence: ‘A power conferred by Parliament in general terms is not to be taken to . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms HL 8-Jul-1999
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 . .
CitedRegina v Special Commissioner And Another, ex parte Morgan Grenfell and Co Ltd HL 16-May-2002
The inspector issued a notice requiring production of certain documents. The respondents refused to produce them, saying that they were protected by legal professional privilege.
Held: Legal professional privilege is a fundamental part of . .
CitedRoberts v Parole Board HL 7-Jul-2005
Balancing Rights of Prisoner and Society
The appellant had been convicted of the murder of three police officers in 1966. His tariff of thirty years had now long expired. He complained that material put before the Parole Board reviewing has case had not been disclosed to him.
Held: . .
CitedRB (Algeria) and Another v Secretary of State for the Home Department; OO (Jordan) v Same; MT (Algeria) v Same HL 18-Feb-2009
Fairness of SIAC procedures
Each defendant was to be deported for fear of involvement in terrorist activities, but feared that if returned to their home countries, they would be tortured. The respondent had obtained re-assurances from the destination governments that this . .
CitedA and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 19-Feb-2009
(Grand Chamber) The applicants had been subjected to severe restrictions. They were foreign nationals suspected of terrorist involvement, but could not be deported for fear of being tortured. The UK had derogated from the Convention to put the . .
CitedA and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 19-Feb-2009
(Grand Chamber) The applicants had been subjected to severe restrictions. They were foreign nationals suspected of terrorist involvement, but could not be deported for fear of being tortured. The UK had derogated from the Convention to put the . .
CitedSecretary of State for the Home Department v AF AN and AE (No 3) HL 10-Jun-2009
The applicants complained that they had been made subject to non-derogating control orders as suspected terrorists, but that the failure to inform them of the allegations or evidence against them was unfair and infringed their human rights. The . .
CitedA v Independent News and Media Ltd and Others CA 31-Mar-2010
The newspapers sought leave to report proceedings before the Court of Protection in connection with a patient unable to manage his own affairs. The patient retained a possible capacity to work as a professional musician. The family wanted the . .
CitedJIH v News Group Newspapers Ltd CA 31-Jan-2011
Principles on Request for Anonymity Order
The defendant appealed against an order granting the anonymisation of the proceeedings.
Held: The critical question is whether there is sufficient general public interest in publishing a report of proceedings which identifies a party by name, . .
CitedHome Office v Tariq SC 13-Jul-2011
(JUSTICE intervening) The claimant pursued Employment Tribunal proceedings against the Immigration Service when his security clearance was withdrawn. The Tribunal allowed the respondent to use a closed material procedure under which it was provided . .
CitedAl Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others SC 13-Jul-2011
The claimant pursued a civil claim for damages, alleging complicity of the respondent in his torture whilst in the custody of foreign powers. The respondent sought that certain materials be available to the court alone and not to the claimant or the . .
CitedAT v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 7-Feb-2012
The claimant challenged a non-derogation control order. . .

Cited by:
See AlsoBank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2) SC 19-Jun-2013
The bank challenged measures taken by HM Treasury to restrict access to the United Kingdom’s financial markets by a major Iranian commercial bank, Bank Mellat, on the account of its alleged connection with Iran’s nuclear weapons and ballistic . .
CitedMX v Dartford and Gravesham NHS Trust and Others CA 17-Feb-2015
Application was made for approval of a compromise of a claim for damages for personal injury for the child. The court now considered whether an order should be made to protect the identity of the six year old claimant.
Held: An order should . .
CitedA v British Broadcasting Corporation (Scotland) SC 8-May-2014
Anonymised Party to Proceedings
The BBC challenged an order made by the Court of Session in judicial review proceedings, permitting the applicant review to delete his name and address and substituting letters of the alphabet, in the exercise (or, as the BBC argues, purported . .
CitedSteinfeld and Keidan, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for International Development (In Substitution for The Home Secretary and The Education Secretary) SC 27-Jun-2018
The applicants, an heterosexual couple wished to enter into a civil partnership under the 2004 Act, rather than a marriage. They complained that had they been a same sex couple they would have had that choice under the 2013 Act.
Held: The . .
CitedJP Whitter (Water Well Engineers) Ltd v Revenue and Customs SC 13-Jun-2018
The taxpayers registration under the Construction Industry Scheme had been withdrawn. The Court was now asked whether HMRC are obliged, or at least entitled, to take into account the impact on the taxpayer’s business of the cancellation of its . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Evidence

Leading Case

Updated: 31 December 2021; Ref: scu.510914

Building Design Partnership Ltd v Standard Life Assurance Ltd: CA 29 Nov 2021

The use of sampling and extrapolation is not uncommon in the Business and Property Courts (particularly the TCC) as a way of corralling evidence and keeping trials within proportionate limits. The essential proposition is that, if the sampled allegations are found, on the balance of probabilities, to be properly representative of the pool of allegations as a whole, then a detailed investigation into the sample can be extrapolated into a result in respect of the pool.
The issue here is whether, as a matter of principle, a claimant can go one step further and plead its original statement of case on an extrapolated basis, without pleading a detailed case on each of the allegations in the pool. What the claimant (‘Standard Life’) sought to do in Part B of its claim was to make a series of specific allegations against the defendant (‘BDP’) arising out of a detailed investigation of 167 variations, and then extrapolate the results of that investigation across the remaining 3,437 variations, without investigating, much less pleading out, a detailed case in relation to those remaining variations.

Lady Justice Macur,
Lord Justice Coulson,
And,
Lord Justice Birss
[2021] EWCA Civ 1793
Bailii
England and Wales

Evidence

Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: scu.670130