Category: Animals

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc v Kymab Ltd and Another: CA 28 Mar 2018

The claimant R now appealed from a finding that its two patents involving transgenic mice were invalid. The ‘in situ replacement’ failed to comply.
Held: The appeal succeeded.

Judges:

Lord Justice Kitchin, LordJustice Floyd, Lady Justice Arden

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 671

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc v Kymab Ltd and Another PatC 1-Feb-2016
The parties disputed the validity of K’s patented mouse. R said that the specification was insufficient to allow reproduction, and that it was therefore incomplete.
Held: The specification was insufficient, and the patents invalid. The issue . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc v Kymab Ltd SC 24-Jun-2020
SC Kymab alleged that the relevant patents are invalid for insufficiency because they did not enable the ordinary skilled person to work the claimed invention across the breadth of the claims. The patents were . .
Main CA Judgment – Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc v Kymab Ltd and Another CA 23-May-2018
Leave to appeal to Supreme Court refused. Other post judgment issues – form of order. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Animals

Updated: 31 December 2022; Ref: scu.608354

Rafiq v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 1997

The court heard an appeal from conviction of an offence under section 3.
Held: The court referred to Bezzina.
Popplewell J dissented from the approach in Bezzina, saying: ‘It seems to me that in order to impose some logic in this case the proper way to approach these cases is to take the view that if there is a bite without a reasonable apprehension immediately before that, the use of the word ‘any occasion’ is sufficient to impose a liability because there are grounds thereafter for reasonable apprehension that it will injury some other person.’
Auld LJ commented: ‘Depending on the circumstances, the time for apprehension, even by the notional reasonable bystander, may be so minimal as for practical purposes to be non-existent. The notion of reasonable apprehension of injury before it occurs in such circumstances, is artificial and the court should strain against adding that unhappy element to an already difficult statutory formulation. It seems to me that Kennedy LJ in that passage was unnecessarily focusing on the injury as if it were a necessary culmination and demonstration of anterior reasonable apprehension of injury. In my view there is no need for such an approach. The act of a dog causing injury, a bite or otherwise, is itself capable of being conduct giving grounds for reasonable apprehension of injury.’

Judges:

Auld LJ and Popplewell J

Citations:

[1997] JP 161

Statutes:

Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Bezzina, Regina v Codling, Regina v Elvin CACD 7-Dec-1993
The offence under section 3(1), requiring the owner to keep a dangerous dog under control, is one of strict liability. The court noted the difference in wording between the sections.
Kennedy LJ said: ‘Accordingly, we come to the conclusion . .

Cited by:

Cited – Gedminintaite, Regina v CACD 15-Feb-2008
Application for leave to appeal against a ruling given by His Honour Judge Gibson as to how he would address the jury in a case of an offence under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991. Rottweiler with no history of aggression attacking passer by.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Animals

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.652234

Gedminintaite, Regina v: CACD 15 Feb 2008

Application for leave to appeal against a ruling given by His Honour Judge Gibson as to how he would address the jury in a case of an offence under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991. Rottweiler with no history of aggression attacking passer by.
Held: Leave refused: ‘On either the interpretation propounded in Rafiq or that of Kennedy LJ in Bezzina, this dog was dangerously out of control. We are inclined to go further. In any event the definitions section, section 10, is not exclusive. It does not read as a matter of construction, ‘For the purposes of this Act, a dog shall only be regarded as dangerously out of control ….’ and then proceed to the definition. Therefore we feel ourselves entitled to go back to the straightforward words of section 3: ‘If a dog is dangerously out of control in a public place ….’ In our judgment, this dog was dangerously out of control in a public place. That was amply evidenced by the way it behaved and the fact that it was not controlled by its handler.’

Judges:

Keene LJ, Hall HHJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Crim 814, (2008) 172 JP 413

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Bezzina, Regina v Codling, Regina v Elvin CACD 7-Dec-1993
The offence under section 3(1), requiring the owner to keep a dangerous dog under control, is one of strict liability. The court noted the difference in wording between the sections.
Kennedy LJ said: ‘Accordingly, we come to the conclusion . .
Cited – Rafiq v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 1997
The court heard an appeal from conviction of an offence under section 3.
Held: The court referred to Bezzina.
Popplewell J dissented from the approach in Bezzina, saying: ‘It seems to me that in order to impose some logic in this case the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Animals

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.270589

Regina v Bezzina, Regina v Codling, Regina v Elvin: CACD 7 Dec 1993

The offence under section 3(1), requiring the owner to keep a dangerous dog under control, is one of strict liability. The court noted the difference in wording between the sections.
Kennedy LJ said: ‘Accordingly, we come to the conclusion that the terms of the statute in section 3(1) do have to be read in the way that we indicated at the start of this judgment. In other words, when one encounters the words in section 3(1) — ‘dangerously out of control’ — one applies the meaning which is set out in section 10(3) and that means, in effect, that if a dog is in a public place, if the person accused is shown to be the owner of the dog, if the dog is dangerously out of control in the sense that the dog is shown to be acting in a way that gives grounds for reasonable apprehension that it would injure anyone, liability follows. Of course, if injury does result then, on the face of it, there must have been, immediately before the injury resulted, grounds for reasonable apprehension that injury would occur.’

Judges:

Kennedy LJ

Citations:

Gazette 02-Feb-1994, Times 07-Dec-1993, [1994] 1 WLR 1057

Statutes:

Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 3(1) 3(2)(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority v First-Tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) CA 3-Feb-2014
The claimant had been riding his cycle. A dog, known to be aggressive, chased him, he swerved ino the path of a car and was severely injured. His claim was rejected by the appellant saying that no crime of violence had been involved. CICA now . .
Cited – Rafiq v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 1997
The court heard an appeal from conviction of an offence under section 3.
Held: The court referred to Bezzina.
Popplewell J dissented from the approach in Bezzina, saying: ‘It seems to me that in order to impose some logic in this case the . .
Cited – Gedminintaite, Regina v CACD 15-Feb-2008
Application for leave to appeal against a ruling given by His Honour Judge Gibson as to how he would address the jury in a case of an offence under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991. Rottweiler with no history of aggression attacking passer by.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals, Crime

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.86129

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc v Kymab Ltd and Another: CA 23 May 2018

Leave to appeal to Supreme Court refused. Other post judgment issues – form of order.

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 1186

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At PatC – Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc v Kymab Ltd and Another PatC 1-Feb-2016
The parties disputed the validity of K’s patented mouse. R said that the specification was insufficient to allow reproduction, and that it was therefore incomplete.
Held: The specification was insufficient, and the patents invalid. The issue . .
Main CA Judgment – Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc v Kymab Ltd and Another CA 28-Mar-2018
The claimant R now appealed from a finding that its two patents involving transgenic mice were invalid. The ‘in situ replacement’ failed to comply.
Held: The appeal succeeded. . .

Cited by:

Request for leave – Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc v Kymab Ltd SC 24-Jun-2020
SC Kymab alleged that the relevant patents are invalid for insufficiency because they did not enable the ordinary skilled person to work the claimed invention across the breadth of the claims. The patents were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Animals

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.617309

Deane v Clayton: 1817

Citations:

(1817) 7 Taunt 489

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – British 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.

Animals

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.181262

Suryananda, Regina (on the Application of) v The Welsh Ministers: Admn 16 Jul 2007

The claimants, trustees of a Hindu temple, sought judicial review of a decision that a bullock in their temple should be slaughtered having positively reacted to a test for bovine tuberculosis bacterium. They said that the animal posed no threat since it was isolated from other anmals and was sacrosanct to them.
Held: The article 9 human rights of the claimants were engaged, and the proposed action would be a gross interference in those rights. It was therefore for the respondent to justify the action by showing a pressing social need. The decision had been reached without sufficient regard to the claimants’ religious freedoms, and would be quashed. The court noted however that a properly reached decision might be the same.

Judges:

Hickinbottom J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 1736 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Animal Health Act 1981 32

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – X v Netherlands ECHR 1962
As a legitimate aim, a Government may rely upon ‘the protection of public . . health’, which includes the health of animals as well as of humans. . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others HL 24-Feb-2005
The appellants were teachers in Christian schools who said that the blanket ban on corporal punishment interfered with their religious freedom. They saw moderate physical discipline as an essential part of educating children in a Christian manner. . .
Cited – De Freitas v The Permanent Secretary of Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, Lands and Housing and others PC 30-Jun-1998
(Antigua and Barbuda) The applicant was employed as a civil servant. He joined a demonstration alleging corruption in a minister. It was alleged he had infringed his duties as a civil servant, and he replied that the constitution allowed him to . .
Cited – Begum (otherwise SB), Regina (on the Application of) v Denbigh High School HL 22-Mar-2006
The student, a Muslim wished to wear a full Islamic dress, the jilbab, but this was not consistent with the school’s uniform policy. She complained that this interfered with her right to express her religion.
Held: The school’s appeal . .
Cited – Regina (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 23-May-2001
A prison policy requiring prisoners not to be present when their property was searched and their mail was examined was unlawful. The policy had been introduced after failures in search procedures where officers had been intimidated by the presence . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Eastside Cheese Company (a Firm) and R A Duckett and Co Interested CA 1-Jul-1999
Application for leave to appeal to House of Lords – refused. However ‘on public health issues which require the evaluation of complex scientific evidence, the national court may and should be slow to interfere with a decision which a responsible . .
Cited – Jewish Liturgical Association Cha’are Shalom Ve Tsedek v France ECHR 27-Jun-2000
The applicants, ultra-orthodox jews, challenged the regulation of ritual slaughter in France, which did not satisfy their exacting religious standards.
Held: The applicants’ right to freedom of expression was not limited by the controls on the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Ecclesiastical, Animals, Administrative, Human Rights

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.258160

Buckle v Holmes: CA 1926

Citations:

[1926] 2 KB 125

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Buckle v Holmes KBD 1925
The defendant’s cat had killed what were said to be valuable racing and homing pigeons and some bantams of the plaintiff. The plaintiff sued for damages for the loss, but was unable to prove that the defendant knew the cat to have any specially . .

Cited by:

Mentioned – Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd CA 1-May-2020
Only Limited Ownership of pond fish
BDS owned land with closed fishing ponds. They sold the land to the respondents, but then claimed that the fish, of substantial value, were not included in the contract. The court as asked whether the captive fish were animals ferae naturae or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.650622

Besozzi v Harris: 1858

The court considered the owner’s liability for injury caused by a bear on a chain on the defendant’s premises.

Citations:

(1858) 1 F and F 92

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Read v J Lyons and Co Ltd HL 1946
The plaintiff was employed by the Ministry of Defence, inspecting a weapons factory. A shell exploded injuring her. No negligence was alleged. The company worked as agent for the ministry.
Held: The respondents were not liable, since there had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.258603

The Ship Frederick Gerring Jr v The Queen: 1 May 1897

(Supreme Court of Canada) The court was asked whether a vessel was forfeit to the Crown on the grounds that it had been used for fishing within a three mile limit from the Canadian coast. The fishing process had started outside the limit. A large quantity of mackerel had been collected in a seine, and the crew proceeded to bale the fish from the seine into the vessel. While that process was under way the vessel moved to within the three mile limit. The question was whether ‘fishing or catching fish’ was happening within the limit, it being argued that the fishing was complete when the fish were within the seine.
Held: by a majority) The process of fishing was not yet complete while the fish were being baled out from the seine into the vessel. Sedgewick J, with whom King J and Girouard J agreed, spoke of the process continuing until the moment when the fish ‘are finally reduced to actual and certain possession’, which he held did not happen in that case until all the fish were on board the vessel. King J and Girouard J both held that the case before that court was analogous to that which had been at issue in Young v Hichens.

Judges:

Sir Henry Strong CJ and Gwynne, Sedgewick, King and Girouard JJ

Citations:

(1897) 27 SCR 271, [1897] CarswellNat 36

Links:

Canlii

Jurisdiction:

Canada

Citing:

Cited – Young v Hichens 21-Nov-1844
The plaintiff was fishing in the sea for pilchards and had drawn his net around a large number of fish, but at a moment when his net remained open by some seven fathoms and he was about to close it, the defendant rowed up to the opening of the net . .

Cited by:

Cited – Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd CA 1-May-2020
Only Limited Ownership of pond fish
BDS owned land with closed fishing ponds. They sold the land to the respondents, but then claimed that the fish, of substantial value, were not included in the contract. The court as asked whether the captive fish were animals ferae naturae or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.650625

Ewart v Graham: HL 1859

The parties disputed the scope and extent of a reservation to the respondent’s father in an Act of Parliament of ‘all rights of hunting, shooting, fishing and fowling’ over certain specified land which had been owned by the respondent’s father and later came into the ownership of the appellant.
Held: Lord Campbell LC described the sporting rights in question as being ‘an interest in the realty which is well known to the law’. He went on to say: ‘The property in animals ferae naturae while they are on the soil belongs to the owner of the soil and he may grant a right to others to come and take them by a grant of hunting, shooting, fowling and so forth; that right may be granted by the owner of the fee simple, and such a grant is a licence of a profit a prendre.’

Judges:

Lord Campbell LC

Citations:

(1859) 7 HLC 331

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd CA 1-May-2020
Only Limited Ownership of pond fish
BDS owned land with closed fishing ponds. They sold the land to the respondents, but then claimed that the fish, of substantial value, were not included in the contract. The court as asked whether the captive fish were animals ferae naturae or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Animals

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.650623

Kearry v Pattinson: CA 1939

A claim was made for damages by the plaintiff bee-keeper, against the defendant, his neighbour. The plaintiff’s bees swarmed and settled in the garden of the defendant. He sought to recover his bees but the neighbour initially refused to give the plaintiff permission to enter his property. But on the next day, the neighbour gave permission to the beekeeper to enter his property. But the bees had flown.
Held: Bees are animals ferae naturae, but become the qualified property of the person who hives them.
‘There is no doubt in this case that these bees had been hived by the plaintiff. Therefore, before they swarmed, they were his property, and I think that the bees, when they swarmed, so long as they were in his sight, and so long as he had power to pursue them, would remain his property . . To that extent he has power to pursue, but I cannot think that he has a legal right to go on to the land of another in order to pursue them. Bees are ferae naturae before being hived. When hived, they are taken into the disposition of the owner, and become his property. They remain his property while they are swarming only so long as they are in his sight, and he has lawful power to pursue them. That is how I read the authorities. Whether the point is right or not, I think that, as a matter of legal principle, it is clear that, once it is established that he has no right to follow the bees, they cannot, the moment his right to follow ceases, be considered his or anybody’s chattels until they are hived again. For that reason, I think that this action is misconceived, because the bees had ceased altogether to be in the disposition of the plaintiff.’

Judges:

Slesser, Clauson and Goddard LJJ

Citations:

[1939] 1 KB 471, [1939] 1 All E R 65

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd CA 1-May-2020
Only Limited Ownership of pond fish
BDS owned land with closed fishing ponds. They sold the land to the respondents, but then claimed that the fish, of substantial value, were not included in the contract. The court as asked whether the captive fish were animals ferae naturae or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals, Land

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.650627

Hamps v Darby: CA 1948

The court was asked as to a civil action concerning the depredations of homing pigeons on crops.
Evershed LJ quoted from Holdsworth’s History of English Law about keeping a singing bird which is of value even though not in monetary terms: ‘For if I have a singing bird, though it be not pecuniarily profitable, yet it refreshes my spirits and gives me good health, which is a greater treasure than great riches. So if anyone takes it from me he does me much damage for which I shall have an action.’

Judges:

Evershed LJ

Citations:

[1948] 2 KB 31, [1948] 2 All ER 474

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd CA 1-May-2020
Only Limited Ownership of pond fish
BDS owned land with closed fishing ponds. They sold the land to the respondents, but then claimed that the fish, of substantial value, were not included in the contract. The court as asked whether the captive fish were animals ferae naturae or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals, Torts – Other

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.650624

Rex v Steer: 1704

A quantity of carp was stolen from a private pond.
Held: the fish were the property of the owner of the pond. The fish could not swim away from an enclosed pond and thereby become lost.

Citations:

(1704) 6 Modern 183, (1704) 87 ER 939

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd CA 1-May-2020
Only Limited Ownership of pond fish
BDS owned land with closed fishing ponds. They sold the land to the respondents, but then claimed that the fish, of substantial value, were not included in the contract. The court as asked whether the captive fish were animals ferae naturae or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Animals

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.650618

Hesketh v Willis Cruisers Ltd: CA 1968

Where the fishing rights have not been severed from the lake or river bed, they simply pass automatically as part of the land; and there is no need for them to be separately transferred to the purchaser of the land

Judges:

Diplock LJ

Citations:

(1968) 19 P and CR 573

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd CA 1-May-2020
Only Limited Ownership of pond fish
BDS owned land with closed fishing ponds. They sold the land to the respondents, but then claimed that the fish, of substantial value, were not included in the contract. The court as asked whether the captive fish were animals ferae naturae or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Animals

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.650620

Buckle v Holmes: KBD 1925

The defendant’s cat had killed what were said to be valuable racing and homing pigeons and some bantams of the plaintiff. The plaintiff sued for damages for the loss, but was unable to prove that the defendant knew the cat to have any specially vicious propensity as compared with cats generally. He therefore argued that, although cats were to be regarded as domitae naturae in general, they should be classified as ferae naturae in relation to birds such as pigeons and bantams.
The distinction was too long and firmly settled as a matter of law for the court to qualify or modify the established classification, however well-disposed they might have been to the proposition if it had not been settled law for a very long time.

Judges:

Shearman J and Sankey J

Citations:

(1925) 134 LT 284

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Buckle v Holmes CA 1926
. .
Cited – Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd CA 1-May-2020
Only Limited Ownership of pond fish
BDS owned land with closed fishing ponds. They sold the land to the respondents, but then claimed that the fish, of substantial value, were not included in the contract. The court as asked whether the captive fish were animals ferae naturae or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.650621

Regina v Townley: 1871

Bovill CJ made it clear that in animals ferae naturae, there was no absolute property. There was only a special or qualified property.

Judges:

Bovill CJ

Citations:

(1871) LR 1 CCR 315

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd CA 1-May-2020
Only Limited Ownership of pond fish
BDS owned land with closed fishing ponds. They sold the land to the respondents, but then claimed that the fish, of substantial value, were not included in the contract. The court as asked whether the captive fish were animals ferae naturae or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals, Crime

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.650619

Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd: ChD 24 Jul 2019

Dispute as to ownership of fish in fishing lake on its sale, and whether solar panels were fixtures. The fish had been purchased for the fishery. Small fish might escape through meshes, but larger fish were captive. The contract of sale of the land had not made explicit provision. The buyer asserted that the process of enclosing the fish created a qualified property per industrial in the fish.
Held: The claim succeeded ut only in part. Fish in their nature and even if held captured were wild animals and not capable of being subject to absolute property rights, though a qualified right could be asserted whilst they were held captive. That qualified property had not been assigned by the contract. Therefore the claimant had a possessory title on which it could found its conversion claim.
As to the solar panels, they were fixtures, and had passed with the contract.

Judges:

Hodge QC HHJ

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 2272 (Ch), [2020] 1 WLR 559, [2019] WLR(D) 626

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Greyes Case 1593
Grey brought an action of trespasse against Bartholmew : the case was : A man did purchase divers fishes, viz. carpes, tenches, trouts, Be. arid put them into his pond for store, and then died.
The question was, whether the heire or the . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd CA 1-May-2020
Only Limited Ownership of pond fish
BDS owned land with closed fishing ponds. They sold the land to the respondents, but then claimed that the fish, of substantial value, were not included in the contract. The court as asked whether the captive fish were animals ferae naturae or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Land, Animals

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.640880

Greyes Case: 1593

Grey brought an action of trespasse against Bartholmew : the case was : A man did purchase divers fishes, viz. carpes, tenches, trouts, Be. arid put them into his pond for store, and then died.
The question was, whether the heire or the executors should have the fish.
Held: It was a felony to steal fish out of a trunk or some narrow place, where they are put to be taken at will and pleasure; but it is otherwise where they are put into a pond.

Citations:

[1650] EngR 91, (1650) Owen 20, (1650) 74 ER 869 (C)

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd ChD 24-Jul-2019
Dispute as to ownership of fish in fishing lake on its sale, and whether solar panels were fixtures. The fish had been purchased for the fishery. Small fish might escape through meshes, but larger fish were captive. The contract of sale of the land . .
Cited – Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd CA 1-May-2020
Only Limited Ownership of pond fish
BDS owned land with closed fishing ponds. They sold the land to the respondents, but then claimed that the fish, of substantial value, were not included in the contract. The court as asked whether the captive fish were animals ferae naturae or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals, Torts – Other

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.416911

Cresswell and Another v Director Of Public Prosecutions: Admn 30 Nov 2006

The defendants opposed the actions of DEFRA in trapping and then killing badgers. They were accused of criminal damage to the traps. They asserted a lawful excuse in seeking to release the badgers. While a wild animal was alive, there was no absolute property in that animal. There might however be, what was known as a qualified property in the animal in three circumstances.

Judges:

Mr Justice (Paul) Walker, Keene L

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 3379 (Admin), 171 JPR 233

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Damage Act 1971

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd CA 1-May-2020
Only Limited Ownership of pond fish
BDS owned land with closed fishing ponds. They sold the land to the respondents, but then claimed that the fish, of substantial value, were not included in the contract. The court as asked whether the captive fish were animals ferae naturae or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals, Crime

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.376260

Young v Hichens: 21 Nov 1844

The plaintiff was fishing in the sea for pilchards and had drawn his net around a large number of fish, but at a moment when his net remained open by some seven fathoms and he was about to close it, the defendant rowed up to the opening of the net and disturbed the fish so that they escaped.
Held: The defendant was not liable for the plaintiff’s loss of the fish, because at the critical moment the plaintiff had not yet taken possession of the fish, which he could only do by closing the net.

Citations:

[1844] EngR 1009, (1844) 6 QB 606, (1844) 115 ER 228

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – The Ship Frederick Gerring Jr v The Queen 1-May-1897
(Supreme Court of Canada) The court was asked whether a vessel was forfeit to the Crown on the grounds that it had been used for fishing within a three mile limit from the Canadian coast. The fishing process had started outside the limit. A large . .
Cited – Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd CA 1-May-2020
Only Limited Ownership of pond fish
BDS owned land with closed fishing ponds. They sold the land to the respondents, but then claimed that the fish, of substantial value, were not included in the contract. The court as asked whether the captive fish were animals ferae naturae or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Animals

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.305601

Blades v Higgs and Another: 8 Jun 1861

Wild animals, whilst living, though they were the property of the owner of the soil on which they were living, were not his personal chattels. Animals ferae naturae killed by a trespasser became the property of the landowner.
Lord Chelmsford said: ‘With respect to wild and unreclaimed animals therefore, there can be no doubt that no property exists in them so long as they remain in the state of nature. It is also equally certain that when killed or reclaimed by the owner of the land on which they are found, or by his authority, they become at once his property, absolutely when they are killed, and in a qualified manner when they are reclaimed.’
Property ratione privilegii is a right by virtue of ‘a peculiar franchise anciently granted by the Crown in virtue of its prerogative’, of which examples include a free warren.

Judges:

Lord Cranworth, Lord Chelmsford

Citations:

[1861] EngR 693, (1861) 10 CB NS 713, (1861) 142 ER 634

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd CA 1-May-2020
Only Limited Ownership of pond fish
BDS owned land with closed fishing ponds. They sold the land to the respondents, but then claimed that the fish, of substantial value, were not included in the contract. The court as asked whether the captive fish were animals ferae naturae or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.284454

High Burrow Organic Farming Partnership, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: Admn 16 Apr 2008

Application of review of decision to cull a herd of cows reared organically after one found to have tuberculosis.

Judges:

Mitting J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 953 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Agriculture, Animals

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.267412

Fitzgerald v Firbank: 1897

The owner of a right of fishing asserted a cause of action without proof of special damage against someone who had polluted the river in which the right was exercised.
Held: A right of fishing was of such a nature that a person who enjoyed it had such possessory rights that he could bring an action for trespass at common law for the infringement of those rights. Rigby LJ: ‘There was another point about several fishery which we do not need to deal with, because the decision of the Queen’s Bench was overruled in that respect. But the important point was whether the grantee could sue in trespass, and in the Court of Exchequer Chamber it was held that he might. The Court of Exchequer Chamber said that it was not necessary for them to decide the question whether the count might not be a count in case, but that they saw no reason to doubt that the Queen’s Bench were right on that point. But that does not mean that the plaintiff can only sue in trespass. I cannot doubt, on the construction of the grant, the right of the plaintiffs by virtue of that grant to sue for a wrongful act which operates as a disturbance of the rights granted by the deed. The argument was pushed with the greatest courage to this extent – that a wrongdoer, unless he tried to do the very thing that the grantees were authorised to do, might destroy the whole subject-matter of the grant and be liable to no action. I never met with any case which gave the slightest colour to such a doctrine. I hold that the grantees of the incorporeal hereditament have a right of action against any person who disturbs them either by trespass or by nuisance, or in any other substantial manner.’

Judges:

Lindley LJ, Rigby LJ, Lopes LJ

Citations:

[1897] 2 Ch 96

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Holford v Bailey 1849
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Watkins v Secretary of State for The Home Departmentand others CA 20-Jul-2004
The claimant complained that prison officers had abused the system of reading his solicitor’s correspondence whilst he was in prison. The defendant argued that there was no proof of damage.
Held: Proof of damage was not necessary in the tort . .
Explained – Nicholas v Ely Beet Sugar Factory Ltd CA 1936
The plaintiff owned several fisheries and sought damages after the defendant polluted the riner. He was unable to prove any actual loss.
Held: Disturbance of a several fishery was an invasion of a legal right, and in such a case the injury to . .
Cited – Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd CA 1-May-2020
Only Limited Ownership of pond fish
BDS owned land with closed fishing ponds. They sold the land to the respondents, but then claimed that the fish, of substantial value, were not included in the contract. The court as asked whether the captive fish were animals ferae naturae or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Animals

Updated: 20 November 2022; Ref: scu.199935

Harkin v Hellawell (Sued As the Chief Constable of West Yorks Police): CA 4 Dec 1997

The claimant had been bitten by a police dog and wished to claim damages. She appealed refusal of an order for records of the dog to be disclosed.
Held: The request was phrased impossibly widely and had been properly refused.

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2915

Statutes:

Animals Act 1971 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Litigation Practice, Animals

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.143314

Keen v Whistler: 1795

Trespass for chasing his cow, and his domestic fowls, viz. hens, geese, and co. with dogs, which dogs were used to bite tame fowl, by whose biting they were killed. On not guilty, verdict for the plaintiff; and he had his full costs, because this is not a trespass wherein the right of the freehold may come in question.

Citations:

[1795] EngR 2266, (1795) 1 Str 534, (1795) 93 ER 683 (C)

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Animals, Torts – Other

Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.354611

Shufflebottom v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester: Admn 7 Feb 2003

The magistrates were asked to make a finding against a dog which was kept within their jurisdiction, but where the incident upon which the application was based, had occurred in Scotland. The appellant contended it should have been heard in Scotland because of section 52 of the 1980 Act.
Held: The 1871 Act conferred a civil jurisdiction, and was related to its care. The section was intended to encourage dangerous dogs to be restrained properly. The case fell within the second or third categories of section 52, and the magistrates had jurisdiction.

Judges:

Mackay J

Citations:

Times 13-Feb-2003, [2003] EWHC 246 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Dogs Act 1871 2, Magistrates Courts Act 1980 52

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Animals, Magistrates

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.179123

Haynes, Regina (on the application of) v Stafford Borough Council: Admn 14 Jun 2006

Walker J set out the principles applicable (in this case) before making a declaration as to the criminal law.

Judges:

Walker J

Citations:

[2006] All ER (D) 135, [2006] EWHC 1366 (Admin), [2007] 1 WLR 1365, (2006) 170 JP 666

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Pet Animals Act 1951, Avian Influenza (Preventive Measures) (No 2) Regulations 2005

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Transport for London v Uber London Ltd Admn 16-Oct-2015
TFL sought a declaration as to the legality of the Uber taxi system. Otherwise unlicensed drivers took fares with fees calculated by means of a smartphone app. The Licensed Taxi drivers said that the app operated as a meter and therefore required . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals, Licensing

Updated: 28 October 2022; Ref: scu.553505

IE v Magistrat Der Stadt Wien (Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora – European Hamster – Judgment): ECJ 2 Jul 2020

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora – Directive 92/43/EEC – Article 12(1) – System of strict protection for animal species – Annex IV – Cricetus cricetus (European hamster) – Resting places and breeding sites – Deterioration or destruction – Areas which have been abandoned

Citations:

C-477/19, [2020] EUECJ C-477/19, ECLI:EU:C:2020:517

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Environment, Animals

Updated: 17 October 2022; Ref: scu.660374

Centraal Israeliitisch Consistorie Van Belgie and Others (Protection of Animals At The Time of Killing – Obligation To Stun Animals Before They Are Killed – Judgment): ECJ 17 Dec 2020

Reference for a preliminary ruling – Protection of animals at the time of killing – Regulation (EC) No 1099/2009 – Article 4(1) – Obligation to stun animals before they are killed – Article 4(4) – Derogation in the context of ritual slaughter – Article 26(2) – Power of Member States to adopt national rules aimed at ensuring more extensive protection of animals in the case of ritual slaughter – Interpretation – National legislation requiring, in the case of ritual slaughter, stunning which is reversible and cannot cause death – Article 13 TFEU – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Article 10 – Freedom of religion – Freedom to manifest religion – Limitation – Proportionality – Lack of consensus among the Member States of the European Union – Discretion afforded to Member States – Principle of subsidiarity – Validity – Differing treatment of ritual slaughter and the killing of animals during hunting or recreational fishing activities and cultural or sporting events – No discrimination – Articles 20, 21 and 22 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights

Citations:

ECLI:EU:C:2020:1031, [2021] WLR(D) 3, C-336/19, [2020] EUECJ C-336/19

Links:

WLRD, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Animals, Human Rights

Updated: 17 October 2022; Ref: scu.660702

Browning v Lewes Crown Court and RSPCA: Admn 24 Apr 2012

The claimant appealed against the refusal by the respondent to state a case regarding its conviction of the claimant of offences under the 2006 Act.
Held: In view of the case of Perkins, the application failed save that the Crown Court should state a case as regards its decision to order the claimant to pay the RSPCA’s costs.

Judges:

Sir John Thomas P, Wyn Williams J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 1003 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Animal Welfare Act 2006

Citing:

Cited – Regina v West London Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Klahn QBD 1979
The issue of a summons by a magistrate is a judicial act: ‘The duty of a magistrate in considering an application for the issue of a summons is to exercise a judicial discretion in deciding whether or not to issue a summons. It would appear that he . .
Applied – Lamont-Perkins v Royal Society for The Prevention of Cruelty To Animals (RSPCA) Admn 24-Apr-2012
The defendant had been convicted of animal cruelty. She appealed to the Crown Court, and now appealed against rulings made by the judge as to the time limits for a prosecution under the 2006 Act in the Magistrates Court. She said that the RSPCA . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals, Crime

Updated: 07 October 2022; Ref: scu.452903

Regina v Knightsbridge Crown Court ex parte Dunne; Brock v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 7 Jul 1993

‘Type of Dog’ has a broader meaning than the phrase ‘Breed of Dog’. American breed standards include characteristic behaviour also.

Citations:

Independent 07-Jul-1993, Times 23-Jul-1993

Statutes:

Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 1(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Animals, Crime

Updated: 29 September 2022; Ref: scu.87093

Gray, Regina (on The Application of) and Others v Crown Court Aylesbury: Admn 12 Mar 2013

The defendant sought judicial review of his convictions under section 4 and section 9 of the 2006 Act. Police had, on the advice of veterinary surgeons removed over one hundred horses for their protection.
Held: Review was granted, and the mattr remitted. It was incorrect to enter a conviction under section 9 of the 2006 Act where the defendant had been acquitted of an offence under section 4 and the neglect shown under section 9 was in fact no worse than that which had caused the unnecessary suffering founding the conviction under section 4. Though no objection could be taken to convictions under each section in respect of the same animal, that could only be proper where some additional evidence justified the more serious conviction.

Judges:

Toulson LJ, Silber J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 500 (Admin), [2014] 1 WLR 818, (2013) 177 JP 329, [2013] CTLC 157, [2013] WLR(D) 204, [2013] 3 All ER 346

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Animal Welfare Act 2006 9

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, Animals

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.471683

Broughton v Bower and Another: CA 25 May 2006

The claimant said that the keeping of various animals by the defendant on their land was in breach of a restrictive covenant and of a compromise agreement which also used the phrase ‘undomesticated animals’. The judge had held that this did not include animals normally kept as pets or were akin to pets.
Held: The appeal succeeded. All of the animals listed were ‘of species which are accustomed to being kept by or to living with humans, brought under their control and tamed.’ and ‘it is an impermissible process of construction to interpret words prefaced by ‘including’ as transmuting that in which they are included into something altogether different from what it would be without them. In the present case it is plain that the words ‘including horses, ponies and geese’ cannot have that effect. All that they do is to extend the meaning of the expression so far as is necessary to prohibit the keeping of three species of domesticated animals. ‘

Judges:

Sir Martin Nourse, Lord Justice Buxton, Lord Justice Neuberger

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 632

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Protection of Animals Act 1911 15(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Animals, Land

Updated: 11 September 2022; Ref: scu.242181

Hughes, Regina (on the Application of) v Minister for Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and Another: CA 30 Jan 2002

Application for leave to appeal against the refusal of her application for permission to apply for judicial review of the decision by the National Assembly for Wales to cull sheep on hefts on the Brecon Beacons.

Judges:

Latham LJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 103

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Wales

Animals, Agriculture

Updated: 11 September 2022; Ref: scu.216706

K and A Jackson and Son, Regina (on The Application of) v Department for The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: Admn 14 Apr 2011

The clamants sought judicial review of the order made by the defendant for the slaughter of their pedigree bull found positive in a test for bovine tuberculosis.

Judges:

McCombe J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 956 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Agriculture, Animals

Updated: 07 September 2022; Ref: scu.432850

Morge v Hampshire County Council: SC 19 Jan 2011

The claimants had challenged the allocation of a former railwy line to become a rapid bus service, saying that the Council had failed properly to take account of the Habitats Directive. The Supreme Court was asked as to the extent of doisturbance to an endangered species required to engage the prohibition againsty ‘deliberate disturbance’ under the directive, and secondlly the extent of the obligation imposed by the Regulations.
Held: Account should be taken of the rarity of the species in question and the impact of the proposed disturbance on the local population. Disturbance includes anything likely to impair an animal’s ability to survive, breed, rear its young, hibernate or migrate, and that which is likely to affect the local distribution or abundance of the species. On the second issue, the correct approach to regulation 3(4) is that permission should be granted save only in cases where the Planning Committee conclude that the proposed development would both offend article 12(1) and be unlikely to be
licensed pursuant to the powers to derogate from the requirements of article 12(1).

Judges:

Lord Walker, Lady Hale, Lord Brown, Lord Mance, Lord Kerr

Citations:

[2011] UKSC 2, UKSC 2010/0120

Links:

Bailii, SC, SC Summ, Bailii Summary

Statutes:

Habitat’s Directive 92/43/EEC 12(1)(b), Conservation (Natural Habitats, etc) Regulations 1994 3(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Leave to appeal – Morge v Hampshire County Council CA 28-Jan-2010
. .
At first Instance – Morge v Hampshire County Council Admn 17-Nov-2009
. .
Appeal from – Morge, Regina (on The Application of) v Hampshire County Council CA 10-Jun-2010
Over time, an abandoned railway line had become a habitat for local wildlife. The claimant now objected to the grant of planning permission for a light railway.
Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. For an act to fall within 12(1)(b) of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Environment, Animals

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.428046

Mcilwaine v Higson, Procurator Fiscal, Airdrie: HCJ 29 Sep 2000

A child was chased and mauled by a male Bull Mastiff, Winston, which, along with a female dog of the same breed had run out of the appellant’s house on to a grassy area where children were playing. The appellant had chased after the dogs and managed to seize the male dog after it commenced an attack on one of the children. The dog then broke free and bit the child again.
Held: The defendant’s appeal succeeded. This had been one incident: ‘The sheriff considered that this was not a ‘single incident’; by grabbing the dog’s collar, the appellant was seeking to re-establish her control over him and had succeeded in doing so for a brief period of a few seconds. The sheriff sees what followed as effectively a separate incident upon which conviction would be justified, even if it were not justified in relation to the previous stages of the attack. Having regard to the nature of the incident as a whole, both before and after the appellant’s brief and ineffectual hold on Winston’s collar, the Advocate Depute accepted that conviction would not be justified on the basis on the resumed attack alone. We are satisfied that the concession was rightly made, and the whole attack is to be regarded as a single incident’.

Judges:

Lord Prosser and Lord Penrose and Lord Bonomy

Citations:

[2000] ScotHC 94, 2000 GWD 31-1211

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Dangerous Dogs Act 1971 10(3)

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

Cited – Thomson v Procurator Fiscal, Peterhead HCJ 16-Dec-2009
The defendant appealed against her conviction for having her dog dangerously out of control in a public place. She said there had been insufficient evidence to justify the finding. The dog was said to had attacked and bitten another dog, and then . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Animals

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.170653

Badger Trust, Regina (on The Application of) v The Welsh Ministers: Admn 16 Apr 2010

The Claimant, the Badger Trust, seeks to challenge the decision of the Minister for Rural Affairs pursuant to the Animal Health Act 1981 to make the Tuberculosis Eradication (Wales) Order 2009

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 768 (Admin), [2010] NPC 45

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Animal Health Act 1981, Tuberculosis Eradication (Wales) Order 2009

Jurisdiction:

Wales

Animals, Administrative

Updated: 17 August 2022; Ref: scu.408636

Department of Agriculture and Rural Development v O’Brien and others: CANI 19 Oct 2006

Appeal by case stated against dismissal of charges under the 1972 and 1981 orders as regards the segregation of certain bovine animals.

Judges:

Nicholson LJ, Campbell LJ and Sheil LJ

Citations:

[2006] NICA 40

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Brucellosis Control Order (Northern Ireland) 1972, Diseases of Animals (Northern Ireland) Order 1981

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Animals

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.246255

Regina v Cox (Jacqueline): CACD 27 Jan 2004

The defendant had been sentenced to nine months imprisonment for the aggravated offence of failing to control her dogs.
Held: Parliament clearly intended that imprisonment should be available to the courts in approriate circumstances. The court was correct to take into account the effects of the offence, in this case a very severe mauling of a young child. Imprisonment was appropriate, but the sentence was reduced to three months. A 10 year ban on keeping dogs remained.

Judges:

Lord Woolf, LCJ, Moses, Levenson JJ

Citations:

Times 20-Feb-2004

Statutes:

Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 3(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Sentencing, Animals

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.193768

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc v Kymab Ltd: SC 24 Jun 2020

SC Kymab alleged that the relevant patents are invalid for insufficiency because they did not enable the ordinary skilled person to work the claimed invention across the breadth of the claims. The patents were concerned with biotechnology, and in particular the production of human antibodies using transgenic mice. By the priority date, the potential uses of antibodies (also known as immunoglobulins) for treating human disease had been well recognised, and a number of different antibodies had been developed and approved for such use. The patents describe a technique for making such antibodies.
Regeneron appealed the decision of Henry Carr J that European Patent (UK) No 1 360 287 and its divisional European Patent (UK) No 2 264 163 are invalid. Kymab cross-appealed against the judge’s finding that its various strains of transgenic mice would infringe claims 5 and 6 of the 287 patent and claim 1 of the 163 patent if those patents had not been invalid. Regeneron’s appeal was allowed by the Court of Appeal. Kymab’s cross-appeal was dismissed.
Held: (Lady Black dissenting) Kymab’s appeal was allowed, holding that the patents were invalid.
An inventor must publish enough information to allow a skilled member of the public to make the product: ‘The essence of the bargain between the patentee and the public is that the patentee dedicates the invention to the public by making full disclosure of it, in return for a time-limited monopoly over its use. The benefit afforded to the public is not merely the disclosure, but the ability to ‘work the invention’ after the expiry of the monopoly by the use of the disclosure. Where the invention enables patentees to make a particular product, and they seek a monopoly over the making and exploitation of the product (which is what a product claim does), they must disclose enough in the teaching of the patent to enable the public also to make the product.’
Thus a patent holder only gains a legal protection which is proportional to the technical contribution to the art, and encourages inventors to conduct research for the benefit of society. Regeneron was claiming a monopoly which was far wider than its contribution to the art; its published patents did not enable a skilled person to make mice containing more than a very small section of the human variable region.

Judges:

Lord Reed, President, Lord Hodge, Lady Black, Lord Briggs, Lord Sales

Citations:

[2020] UKSC 27, UKSC 2018/0131, [2020] RPC 22, [2021] 1 All ER 475, [2020] Bus LR 1394

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 20 02 11 am Video, SC 20 02 11 pm Video, SC 20 02 12 am Video, SC 20 02 12 pm Video, SC Facts and History

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At PatC – Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc v Kymab Ltd and Another PatC 1-Feb-2016
The parties disputed the validity of K’s patented mouse. R said that the specification was insufficient to allow reproduction, and that it was therefore incomplete.
Held: The specification was insufficient, and the patents invalid. The issue . .
Appeal from – Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc v Kymab Ltd and Another CA 28-Mar-2018
The claimant R now appealed from a finding that its two patents involving transgenic mice were invalid. The ‘in situ replacement’ failed to comply.
Held: The appeal succeeded. . .
Request for leave – Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc v Kymab Ltd and Another CA 23-May-2018
Leave to appeal to Supreme Court refused. Other post judgment issues – form of order. . .
Cited – Ferrazzini v Italy ECHR 12-Jul-2001
(Grand Chamber) The court had to decide whether tax proceedings brought by the state against an individual involved the determination of a civil right within the meaning of article 6(1). It was argued by the Government that the existence of an . .
Cited – May and Baker Ltd and others v Boots Pure Drug Company Ltd HL 9-Feb-1950
A beneficial therapeutic effect was said to be of the essence of the claim. The House considered whether in defending the validity of a patent, the patentee might be allowed an application to amend the patent specification. The patentee had not been . .
Cited – Biogen Plc v Medeva Plc HL 31-Oct-1996
The claim patented sought to protect a genetic molecule rather than a whole mouse namely that the molecule would, if inserted into a suitable host cell, cause the cell to make antigens of the Hepatitis B virus. A recombinant method of making the . .
Cited – Rockwater Ltd v Technip France Sa (Formerly Coflexip Sa), Technip Offshore UK Limited (Formerly Coflexip Stena Offshore Limited) CA 6-Apr-2004
Jacob LJ said that the skilled person who must be enabled to make the product from a patent specification, is not expected to be inventive or even, as is sometimes said, imaginative . .
Cited – H Lundbeck A/S v Generics (UK) Ltd and others CA 10-Apr-2008
The court heard an appeal against a finding that a patent for a chemical compound was invalid for insufficiency.
Held: The appeal succeeded.
Enough information to ‘work the invention’ meant in order to make the product. . .
Cited – Actavis Group PTC EHF and Others v ICOS Corporation and Another SC 27-Mar-2019
The court considered: ‘the application of the test of obviousness under section 3 of the Patents Act 1977 to a dosage patent. In summary, a patent, whose validity is not challenged, identified a compound as an efficacious treatment but did not . .
Cited – Generics (UK) Ltd and others v H Lundbeck A/S HL 25-Feb-2009
Patent properly granted
The House considered the patentability of a chemical product, citalopram made up of two enantiomers, as opposed to the process of its creation, questioning whether it could be new or was insufficient within the 1977 Act.
Held: The appeal . .
Cited – Kirin-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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Animals

Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.651925

RSPCA v Johnson: Admn 16 Oct 2009

Appeal by the RSPCA by way of case stated from a decision refusing to hear an information laid by the Society on the basis that it was out of time. The defendant was a horse owner accused of causing suffering in his horse.
Held: Pill LJ said: ‘There is no principle of law that knowledge in a prosecutor begins immediately any employee of that prosecutor has the relevant knowledge and Donnachie does not establish one. It is right that prosecutors are not entitled to shuffle papers between officers or sit on information so as to extend a time limit. There is, however, a degree of judgment involved in bringing a prosecution, and knowledge . . involves an opportunity for those with appropriate skills to consider whether there is sufficient information to justify a prosecution.
It is not disputed that the Society have a department making decisions as to whether to prosecute. That is separate from the role of the investigating officers who obtain information on the ground . . .It is in the public interest that prosecutions are brought only upon a consideration of the evidence by an expert mind . .’

Judges:

Pill LJ, Rafferty J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 2702 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Animal Welfare Act 2006

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Riley and Others v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 18-Oct-2016
The defendants appealed by case stated from convictions under the 2006 Act arising from the treatment of cows including at a slaughterhouse. Arguments were put that the prosecution was time barred.
Held: The court recognsed the limited role of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals, Crime

Updated: 05 August 2022; Ref: scu.377565

Rubach (Environment and Consumers): ECJ 16 Jul 2009

ECJ Protection of species of wild fauna and flora Species listed in Annex B to Regulation (EC) No 338/97 Evidence of lawful acquisition of specimens of those species Burden of proof – Presumption of innocence – Rights of the defence.

Citations:

C-344/08, [2009] EUECJ C-344/08

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Animals, Criminal Practice

Updated: 03 August 2022; Ref: scu.374271

Cresswell v Sirl: CA 1948

The defendant shot and killed the plaintiff’s dog. The plaintiff claimed damages for trespass to property, the property being the dog. The defence was that the defendant was justified in killing the dog because it was threatening his sheep.
Held: The principle enunciated in Cope was of general application to all justifications for all acts of trespass.

Judges:

Scott LJ

Citations:

[1948] 1 KB 241

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Explained – Cope v Sharpe (No 2) CA 1912
The court considered defences to assault; whether the defendant was justified in doing certain acts of trespass on the plaintiff’s land for the purpose of preventing heath fire and consequent loss and damage to the property of the defendant’s . .

Cited by:

Cited – Ashley and Another v Sussex Police CA 27-Jul-2006
The deceased was shot by police officers raiding his flat in 1998. The claimants sought damages for his estate. They had succeeded in claiming damages for false imprisonment, but now appealed dismissal of their claim for damages for assault and . .
Cited – Ashley and Another v Chief Constable of Sussex Police HL 23-Apr-2008
The claimants sought to bring an action for damages after a family member suspected of dealing drugs, was shot by the police. At the time he was naked. The police officer had been acquitted by a criminal court of murder. The chief constable now . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Animals

Leading Case

Updated: 31 July 2022; Ref: scu.244748

Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami v European Commission: ECFI 25 Apr 2013

ECFI Trade in seal products – Regulation (EC) No 1007/2009 – Detailed rules for implementation – Regulation (EU) No 737/2010 – Prohibition on placing such products on the market – Exception in favour of Inuit communities – Plea of illegality – Legal basis – Subsidiarity – Proportionality – Misuse of powers

Judges:

A. Dittrich P

Citations:

T-526/10, [2013] EUECJ T-526/10

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 1007/2009, Regulation (EU) No 737/2010

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Wightman and Others v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union ECJ 10-Dec-2018
Art 50 Notice withrawable unilaterally
Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 50 TEU – Notification by a Member State of its intention to withdraw from the European Union – Consequences of the notification – Right of unilateral revocation of the notification – Conditions
The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.503490

Regina v Daventry District Council ex parte Thornby Farms: Admn 28 Jul 2000

The council granted licences for the disposal of waste animal carcasses by incineration. The objectors said the council had failed to take note of art 4 of the directive, and that as clinical waste alternative regimes applied.
Held: Animal waste and clinical waste were properly distinguished, and the council had applied the correct guidance. The council was entitled to assume on the evidence that no way of preventing the emissions was available. The requirements of the legislation should have been read to impose a continuing obligation to assess not just the machinery used, but also additional available steps to reduce emissions to a minimum. Nevertheless the decision stood. In the second case, there was no obligation to refuse planning permissions either because there is no immediate need for the land or because the relevant decision makes no positive contribution towards meeting the objective. Appeals refused.

Judges:

Lord Justice Pill, Lord Justice Robert Walker, And Mr Justice Laddie

Citations:

Times 05-Oct-2000, Gazette 14-Sep-2000, [2000] EWHC Admin 382

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Hazardous Waste Directive 91/689/EEC, Controlled Waste Regulations 1992, Environmental Protection Act 1990, Council Directive 75/442/EEC, as amended by 91/156/EEC and 96/350/EEC Waste Framework Directive. Article 4, Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994 (1994/1056), Animal Waste Directive (90/425/EEC), Air Pollution Directive (84/360/EEC), Animal By-products Order 1992 (SI 1992 No 3303)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Commission of the European Communities (Supported by the United Kingdom) v Hellenic Republic ECJ 7-Jul-2000
When assessing the penalty to be imposed on a member state for failing to comply with a judgement of the court the court had to look at the duration of the breach, its seriousness, and its ability to pay. Here a fine of 20.000 Euros per day was . .
Cited – Regina v Leicester County Council Hepworth Building Products Limited and Onyx (UK) Limited, ex parte Blackfordby and Boothcorpe Action Group Ltd Admn 15-Mar-2000
. .
Appealed to – Thornby Farms Ltd, Murray v Daventry District Council, Derbyshire County Council CA 22-Jan-2002
Two parties appealed against the grant of licences for plants for the disposal of animal carcasses. The plants would increase the amount of emissions into the environment.
Held: An objective was different to a material consideration. An . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Thornby Farms Ltd, Murray v Daventry District Council, Derbyshire County Council CA 22-Jan-2002
Two parties appealed against the grant of licences for plants for the disposal of animal carcasses. The plants would increase the amount of emissions into the environment.
Held: An objective was different to a material consideration. An . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals, Agriculture, Environment, European

Updated: 15 July 2022; Ref: scu.140197

Schwaninger Martin, Viehhandel – Viehexport v Zollamt Salzburg, Erstattungen: ECJ 28 Feb 2008

ECJ Opinion – Export refunds – Protection of bovine animals during transport – Rest periods – Route plan

Citations:

C-207/06, [2008] EUECJ C-207/06 – O

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 615/98, Directive 91/628/EEC

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Opinion – Schwaninger Martin, Viehhandel – Viehexport v Zollamt Salzburg, Erstattungen ECJ 17-Jul-2008
ECJ Regulation (EC) No 615/98 – Export refunds – Welfare of live bovine animals during transport – Directive 91/628/EEC – Applicability of the rules relating to the protection of animals during transport – Rules . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Agriculture, Animals

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.266099

North Wales Police v Anglesey Justices and Another: Admn 5 Feb 2008

Maurice Kay LJ said: ‘Mr Wells submits, and I accept, that the form and content of the summons are not strictly relevant to the question whether the proceedings were initiated by complaint rather than by the laying of an information. The essential question for the Magistrates’ Court was whether what was lodged at court was in substance a complaint.’

Judges:

Maurice Kay LJ

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 309 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Dogs Act 1871 2

Cited by:

Cited – Brown, Regina v (Northern Ireland) SC 26-Jun-2013
The complainaint, a 13 year old girl had first said that the defendant had had intercourse with her againt her consent. After his arrest, she accepted that this was untrue. On being recharged with unlawful intercourse, he admitted guilt believing he . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals, Magistrates

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.266037

Kempter (Area of Freedom, Security and Justice): ECJ 12 Feb 2008

ECJ Export of cattle – Export refunds – Final administrative decision – Interpretation of a judgment of the Court – Effect of a preliminary ruling given by the Court after that decision – Review and withdrawal – Time-limits – Legal certainty – Principle of cooperation – Article 10 EC

Citations:

C-2/06, [2008] EUECJ C-2/06

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Animals

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.264464

Stoddart v Perucca: CA 1 Mar 2011

The claimant was injured crossing a road when approached by the defendant’s campervan. The judge had taken avccount of another driver who said that he had slowed down anticipating the emergence of a second horse and rider (the claimant), but the defendant had not done so. The defendant appealed against a finding that his failure to anticipate a second rider was negligent, saying that the apportionment of liability should be as to 75% to the rider.
Held: The appeal failed. The apportionment by the judge at 50%/50% had been within the range of findings open to him.

Judges:

Lord Neuberger MR, Sedley, Hooper LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 290

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Lunt v Khelifa CA 22-May-2002
The claimant pedestrian had been injured when hit by a car driven by the defendant as she stepped into the roadway. Both parties appealed against the assessment of contributory negligence. The claimant had a blood alcohol level three times that . .
Cited – Toropdar v D QBD 2-Oct-2009
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Animals

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.430738

Whaley and Another v Lord Advocate: HL 28 Nov 2007

The House considered claims that the 2002 Act, which set out to make unawful the hunting of wild mammals with dogs unlawful, infringed the claimants’ human rights, in that it contravened international treaties requiring the support for traditional practices and cultures.
Held: Any interference with the appellants article 11 rights was justified. The Act was not outwith the competence of the Scottish Parliament.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood

Citations:

[2007] UKHL 53

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002, European Convention on Human Rights 11, Rio Declaration on Environment and Development of 1992

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

Appeal from – Friend In Petition of Hagan, Friend v The Lord Advocate SCS 27-Sep-2005
. .
Cited – Felix Palacios de la Villa v Cortefiel Servicios SA ECJ 15-Feb-2007
Europa Council Directive 2000/78/EC Article 6 – General principle of Community law – Age discrimination – Compulsory retirement – Direct effect – Obligation to set aside conflicting national law. . .
Cited – Zipher Ltd v Markem Systems Ltd PatC 16-Jan-2007
. .
Cited – Regina v Coutts HL 19-Jul-2006
The defendant was convicted of murder. Evidence during the trial suggested a possibility of manslaughter, but neither the defence nor prosecution proposed the alternate verdict. The defendant now appealed saying that the judge had an independent . .
Cited – A v The Scottish Ministers PC 15-Oct-2001
(Scotland) The power to detain a person suffering from a mental illness, in order to ensure the safety of the public, and even though there was no real possibility of treatment of the mental condition in hospital, was not a disproportionate . .

Cited by:

Cited – Countryside Alliance and others, Regina (on the Application of) v Attorney General and Another HL 28-Nov-2007
The appellants said that the 2004 Act infringed their rights under articles 8 11 and 14 and Art 1 of protocol 1.
Held: Article 8 protected the right to private and family life. Its purpose was to protect individuals from unjustified intrusion . .
Cited – Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate SC 12-Dec-2012
The claimant company said that the 2010 Act was outside the competence of the Scottish Parliament insofar as it severely restricted the capacity of those selling cigarettes to display them for sale. They suggested two faults. First, that the subject . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Animals, Crime

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.261604

Secretary of State for the Home Office v British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection and Another: QBD 25 Apr 2008

Judges:

Eady J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 892 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Freedom of Information Act 2000, Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 24

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection v Home Office and Another CA 30-Jul-2008
The union sought disclosure of information supplied to the respondent when the applicant applied for licences to carry out animal experiments.
Held: The information had been supplied in confidence. The test was a subjective one as to the state . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Information, Animals

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.267125

Shaw v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 25 Jan 2007

The defendant appealed by case started against his conviction for having custody of a dog whilst subject to a prohibition order.

Judges:

Scott Barker LJ, David Clarke J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 207 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Protection of Animals (Amendment) Act 1954

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Animals, Crime

Updated: 09 July 2022; Ref: scu.248942

G.J. Dokter, Maatschap Van den Top, W. Boekhout v Minister van Landbouw, Natuur en Voedselkwaliteit: ECJ 15 Jun 2006

Europa Agriculture – Control of foot-and-mouth disease – Directive 85/511/EEC – Directive 90/425/EEC- Examinations to detect foot-and mouth-disease carried out by a laboratory not listed in the annex to Directive 85/511/EEC – National authorities-? discretion – Principle of proportionality – Principle of respect for the rights of the defence.

Citations:

C-28/05, [2006] EUECJ C-28/05

Links:

Bailii

European, Agriculture, Animals

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.242571

Commission v Spain: ECJ 18 May 2006

ECJ Failure by a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 92/43/EEC – Conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora – Protection of species – Hunting using stopped snares in private hunting areas – Castilla y Leon.
The setting of stopped snares was said to have endangered the lives of the otter.
Held: ‘For the condition as to ‘deliberate’ action in Article 12(1)(a) of the Directive to be met, it must be proven that the author of the act intended the capture or killing of a specimen belonging to a protected animal species or, at the very least, accepted the possibility of such capture or killing.’

Citations:

C-221/04, [2006] EUECJ C-221/04, [2005] Env LR 20

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 92/43/EEC 12(1)(a)

Cited by:

Cited – Morge, Regina (on The Application of) v Hampshire County Council CA 10-Jun-2010
Over time, an abandoned railway line had become a habitat for local wildlife. The claimant now objected to the grant of planning permission for a light railway.
Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. For an act to fall within 12(1)(b) of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Environment, Animals

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241906

Greenpeace Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: CA 31 Oct 2005

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1656

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal From – Greenpeace Ltd, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Admn 10-Oct-2005
Greenpeace asserted that the respondent had failed to make adequate arrangements to protect the common dolphin from unintended mortality from fishing activities as it was required to do under the Regulation. Measures had been proposed but they were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals, Environment

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238603