Regina v Whyte: 1988

(Canadian Supreme Court) The court rejected an argument that as a matter of principle a constitutional presumption of innocence only applies to elements of the offence and not excuses: ‘The real concern is not whether the accused must disprove an element or prove an excuse, but that an accused may be convicted while a reasonable doubt exists. When that possibility exists, there is a breach of the presumption of innocence. The exact characterization of a factor as an essential element, a collateral factor, an excuse, or a defence should not affect the analysis of the presumption of innocence. It is the final effect of a provision on the verdict that is decisive. If an accused is required to prove some fact on the balance of probabilities to avoid conviction, the provision violates the presumption of innocence because it permits a conviction in spite of a reasonable doubt in the mind of the trier of fact as to the guilt of the accused.’

Judges:

Dickson CJC

Citations:

(1988) 51 DLR 4th 481

Jurisdiction:

Canada

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Lambert HL 5-Jul-2001
Restraint on Interference with Burden of Proof
The defendant had been convicted for possessing drugs found on him in a bag when he was arrested. He denied knowing of them. He was convicted having failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he had not known of the drugs. The case was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.194985

Ambard v Attorney-General for Trinidad and Tobago: PC 1936

It is competent for Her Majesty in Council to entertain appeals against orders of courts of record overseas imposing penalties for contempt of court.

Citations:

[1936] AC 322

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBadry v The Director of Public Prosecutions PC 15-Nov-1982
(Mauritius) The applicant appealed three counts of contempt of court, arising from speeches made by him in the political debate. He had been a minister, but was subject to investigation for fraud. To found a appeal he had to show some blatant or . .
CitedMaharaj v Attorney General for Trinidad and Tobago PC 11-Oct-1976
A judge of the High Court had committed the barrister appellant to prison for seven days for contempt in the face of the court. The barrister was granted special leave to appeal to the Board against the committal order.
Held: Allowing the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.180547

Kwaku Mensah v The King: PC 1946

(West Africa) The judge had failed to give a direction on provocation in a murder case where the issue properly arose.
Lord Goddard said: ‘But if on the whole of the evidence there arises a question whether or not the offence might be manslaughter only, on the ground of provocation as well as on any other ground, the judge must put that question to the jury. This was distinctly laid down in Rex v Hopper [1915] 2 KB 431, a case in some respects resembling the present, more especially in that the line of defence adopted was that the killing was accidental and no attempt had been made at the trial to rely on provocation. The ruling was expressly approved by the House of Lords in Mancini v Director of Public Prosecutions [1942] AC 1. The reason for the rule is that on an indictment for murder it is open to the jury to find a verdict of either murder or manslaughter, but the onus is always on the prosecution to prove that the offence amounts to murder if that verdict is sought. If on the whole of the evidence there is nothing which could entitle a jury to return the lesser verdict the judge is not bound to leave it to them to find murder or manslaughter. But if there is any such evidence then, whether the defence have relied on it or not, the judge must bring it to the attention of the jury, because if they accept it or are left in doubt about it the prosecution have not proved affirmatively a case of murder.’

Judges:

Lord Goddard

Citations:

[1946] AC 83, [1945] UKPC 51, (1946) 2 CR 113, [1946] 2 WWR 455

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Citing:

CitedRegina v Hopper CCA 1914
Lord Reading CJ said: ‘We do not assent to the suggestion that as the defence throughout the trial was accident, the judge was justified in not putting the question as to manslaughter. Whatever the line of defence adopted by counsel at the trial of . .
CitedMancini v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1941
There are exceptional cases to the rule in Woolmington for: ‘offences where onus of proof is specially dealt with by statute’. ‘There is no reason to repeat to the jury the warning as to reasonable doubt again and again, provided that the direction . .

Cited by:

ApprovedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Daley PC 1980
(Jamaica) The defendants had an argument with the deceased, who ran from them, tripped on a concrete ramp and fell. He died a few days later. The accused had thrown stones at him while he was running from them. The prosecution alleged that he died . .
CitedRegina 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.243354

Attorney-General of Hong Kong v Wong Muk Ping: PC 1987

When making findings of credibility and reliability it is unsafe for a trial judge to compartmentalise the case: ‘It is commonplace of judicial experience that a witness who makes a poor impression in the witness box may be found at the end of the day, when his evidence is considered in the light of all the other evidence bearing upon the issue, to have been both truthful and accurate. Conversely, the evidence of a witness who at first seemed impressive and reliable may at the end of the day have to be rejected. Such experience suggests that it is dangerous to assess the credibility of the evidence given by any witness in isolation from other evidence in the case which is capable of throwing light on its reliability; . . .’

Judges:

Lord Bridge of Harwich

Citations:

[1987] AC 501, [1987] 2 WLR 1033, Gazette 25-Mar-1987

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedSmith New Court Securities Ltd v Scrimgeour Vickers HL 21-Nov-1996
The defendant had made misrepresentations, inducing the claimant to enter into share transactions which he would not otherwise have entered into, and which lost money.
Held: A deceitful wrongdoer is properly liable for all actual damage . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.191182

Regina v Daly: 1968

The court considered the availability of mistake as to consent as a defence to a charge of rape: ‘What the learned trial judge did in the present case was to omit from the definition of rape that he gave to the jury all reference to the element of intention … but to tell the jury that it was a defence to the charge of rape if the accused honestly believed on reasonable grounds that the girl was consenting. He also told them that the Crown had to satisfy them beyond reasonable doubt that the accused did not have such a belief. Even if it were proper to discuss the mental aspect of a charge of rape in terms of a defence of reasonable mistake of fact, this direction as to onus would be erroneous.’

Judges:

Smith J

Citations:

(1968) VLR 257

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Morgan HL 30-Apr-1975
The defendants appealed against their convictions for rape, denying mens rea and asserting a belief (even if mistaken) that the victim had consented.
Held: For a defence of mistake to succeed, the mistake must have been honestly made and need . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Commonwealth

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.258680

Deaton v Attorney General and Revenue Commissioners: 1963

(Supreme Court of Ireland) The court looked at a law in which the choice of alternative penalties was left to the executive: ‘There is a clear distinction between the prescription of a fixed penalty and the selection of a penalty for a particular case. The prescription of a fixed penalty is the statement of a general rule, which is one of the characteristics of legislation; this is wholly different from the selection of a penalty to be imposed in an individual citizen’s case; it states the general rule, and the application of that rule is for the Courts . . The selection of punishment is an integral part of the administration of justice, and, as such, cannot be committed to the hands of the executive . . ‘

Citations:

[1963] IR 170

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHinds and other v The Queen; Director of Public Prosecutions v Jackson, attorney General of Jamaica (Intervenor) PC 1-Dec-1975
The Gun Court Act 1974 of Jamaica established special courts at different levels to deal with varieties of crimes involving guns. There was provision for hearings to be held in camera. Certain offences carried mandatory life sentences reviewable . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Constitutional, Commonwealth

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.211410

Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Lenah Game Meats Pty Ltd: 15 Nov 2001

(High Court of Australia) The activities of a company which processed possum meat for export (‘what the processing of possums looks,and sounds like’) were not such as to attract the quality of being confidential for the purpose of the law protecting confidentiality.
Austlii Equity – Equitable remedies – Interlocutory injunction – Principles to be applied – Need for plaintiff to show a serious question to be tried – Defence that plaintiff has no equity – Nature of discretion to grant interlocutory relief – Relevance of implied freedom of political communication under the Constitution.
Practice and procedure – Interlocutory injunctions – Power of Supreme Court to grant interlocutory injunction – Whether s 11(12) of Supreme Court Civil Procedure Act 1932 (Tas) alters basis on which the Supreme Court has power to grant an interlocutory injunction – Purpose for which power exists to grant an interlocutory injunction – Meaning of ‘just and convenient’.
Torts – Privacy – Whether Australian law recognises a tort of invasion of privacy – Whether right to privacy attaches to corporations – Relevance of implied freedom of political communication under the Constitution to the tort of privacy.
Constitutional law (Cth) – Interpretation of Constitution – Implications from Constitution – Implied freedom of communication concerning government and political matters – Whether law providing for interlocutory injunction against broadcaster infringes implied freedom – Whether injunction if granted would infringe freedom – Relevance of implied freedom to grant of injunction – Whether properly or at all taken into account.
Trespass to land – Trespasser illegally made clandestine film of activities and gave it to a broadcaster – Whether owner has right to restrain publication of film by broadcaster.
Words and phrases – ‘unconscionability’ – ‘just and convenient’ – ‘interlocutory injunction’.

Judges:

Gleeson CJ

Citations:

[2001] HCA 63, 208 CLR 199, [2001] 185 ALR 1, 76 ALJR 1

Links:

Austlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedTillery Valley Foods v Channel Four Television, Shine Limited ChD 18-May-2004
The claimant sought an injunction to restrain the defendants broadcasting a film, claiming that it contained confidential material. A journalist working undercover sought to reveal what he said were unhealthy practices in the claimant’s meat . .
CitedMurray v Express Newspapers Plc and Another ChD 7-Aug-2007
The claimant, now aged four and the son of a famous author, was photographed by use of a long lens, but in a public street. He now sought removal of the photograph from the defendant’s catalogue, and damages for breach of confidence.
Held: The . .
AppliedHosking and Hosking v Simon Runting and Another 25-Mar-2004
(Court of Appeal of New Zealand) A photographer was commissioned to take photographs of the children of a well known television personality. He took pictures of Mr Hosking’s eighteen month old twins being pushed down a street by their mother. Mr and . .
CitedImerman v Tchenguiz and Others QBD 27-Jul-2009
It was said that the defendant had taken private and confidential material from the claimant’s computer. The claimant sought summary judgement for the return of materials and destruction of copies. The defendant denied that summary judgement was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Information, Equity, Constitutional

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.197006

Cobham v Frett: PC 18 Dec 2000

(British Virgin Islands) Two issues arose. First, what was the consequence of inordinate delay between a judge hearing a case and giving his decision, and secondly, how was the law of adverse possession to be applied in cases of interrupted or intermittent occupation. The parties had had resolved a dispute as to the ownership of land, but the winner moved to England, and the neighbour began acts to retake the land. The action to retake the land was heard, but judgement was not given until over a year after the hearing.
Held: There was a suggestion that the judge had misremembered some of the evidence, but his notes were detailed, and there was no evidence that the delay had actually effected the judgement. Such would have to be shown to justify setting aside a judgement on this ground. Similarly the judge’s analysis of the law was correct.
Legatt LJ said: ‘As to demeanour, two things can be said. First, in their Lordships’ collective experience, a judge re-reading his notes of evidence after the elapse of a considerable period of time can expect, if the notes are of the requisite quality, his impressions of the witnesses to be revived by the re-reading. Second, every experienced judge, and Georges J was certainly that, is likely to make notes as a trial progresses recording the impressions being made on him by the witnesses. Notes of this character would not, without the judge’s permission or special request being made to him, form part of the record on an appeal. They might be couched in language quite unsuitable for public record.’

Judges:

Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Scott of Foscote Sir Ivor Richardson The Rt. Hon. Edward Zacca

Citations:

Times 24-Jan-2001, [2000] UKPC 49, [2001] 1 WLR 1775

Links:

Bailii, PC, PC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedGoose v Wilson Sandford and Co and Mainon CA 13-Feb-1998
A judge was properly criticised for failing to write up a judgment when the witness’ evidence was still fresh in his mind. A two year delay required a re-trial.
Peter Gibson LJ explained the potential effect of delay on the formulation and . .
CitedWest Bank Estates Ltd v Arthur PC 1967
(From Federal Supreme Court of the West Indies) A claim was made for possessory title to a strip of land, based upon acts of cultivation, the cutting of timber, wood and grass, fishing and growing rice. The trial judge disallowed the claim to a . .

Cited by:

CitedBoodhoo, Jagram, (suing on behalf of themselves and the Sanatan Dharma Sudhar Sadha) v The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago PC 1-Apr-2004
PC (Trinidad and Tobago) The complainant said that his constitutional rights had been infringed by the court’s delay. Proceedings had begun in 1987 for redress with regard to a land dispute. There was substantial . .
CitedBangs v Connex South Eastern Ltd CA 27-Jan-2005
The failure of a tribunal to promulgate its decision was a matter of fact not of law, and could not therefore itself be a ground of appeal to the EAT. The EAT had allowed an appeal on the fair trial provision of the Convention. A failure to . .
CitedBond v Dunster Properties Ltd and Others CA 21-Apr-2011
The defendant appealed against the judge’s findings as to fact delivered some 22 months after the hearing.
Held: The appeal failed. Though such a delay must require the court carefully to investigate the judgment, it did not of itself . .
CitedSS (Sri Lanka), Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 15-Jun-2018
The court was asked whether, in cases heard by the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) where the credibility of the appellant is in issue, there is a rule that a delay of more than three months between the hearing of oral evidence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Land, Litigation Practice

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.163263

Norbis v Norbis: 30 Apr 1986

The parties disputed a settlement of property on divorce, and on appeal the court had to consider how it should approach a judgment made at the discretion of the judge at first instance.
Held: After citing Bellendon, Brennan J added: ‘The ‘generous ambit within which reasonable disagreement is possible’ is wide indeed when there are a number of factors to be taken into account and the comparative weight to be attributed to those factors is not clearly indicated by uniform standards and values of the community. The generous ambit of reasonable disagreement marks the area of immunity from appellate interference.’

Judges:

Brennan J

Citations:

(1986) 161 CLR 513, [1986] HCA 17

Links:

Austlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedBellenden (formerly Satterthwaite) v Satterthwaite CA 1948
The court considered the role of the appeal court in assessing an order for maintenance payable for a divorced wife. The judge’s decision had been made by an exercise of his discretion.
Held: Asquith LJ said: ‘It is, of course, not enough for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Commonwealth, Family

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.420230

Mobil Oil New Zealand Ltd v Mandeno: 1995

A time provision governing the time within which the lessee may serve a counternotice is of the essence.

Citations:

[1995] 3 NZLR 114

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedErnest John Fifield and Another v W and R Jack Limited PC 29-Jun-2000
PC (New Zealand) The tenants sought an extension of time to take their rent review to arbitration. The Landlords appealed a grant of leave.
Held: The grant of leave was discretionary where the court found . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.244802

Dillon v The Queen: PC 25 Jan 1982

(Jamaica) The appellant police officer had been convicted that by his negligence he had allowed two prisoners to escape from custody. Given doubt that they were in fact lawfully in custody he argued that there was an onus on the prosecution to establish that there was a lawful custody from which to escape. There was no affirmative evidence that the prisoners had ever been lawfully detained.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The courts will not allow a point central to the allegation to be presumed.
Lord Fraser said: ‘Their Lordships are of the opinion that it was essential for the Crown to establish that the arrest and detention were lawful and that the omission to do so was fatal to the conviction of the defendant. . . The lawfulness of the detention was a necessary precondition for the offence of permitting escape, and it is well established that the courts will not presume the existence of facts which are central to an offence . . It has to be remembered that in every case where a police officer commits the offence of negligently permitting a prisoner to escape from lawful custody, the prisoner himself commits an offence by escaping and it would be contrary to the fundamental principles of law that the onus should be upon a prisoner to rebut a presumption that he was being lawfully detained which he could only do by the (notoriously difficult) process of proving a negative.’

Judges:

Lord Fraser

Citations:

[1982] AC 484, [1982] UKPC 1a, (1982) 74 Cr App R 274, [1982] 2 WLR 538, [1982] 1 All ER 1017, [1982] Crim LR 438

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Dhilon (Pritpal) CACD 23-Nov-2005
The defendant appealed his conviction for escaping from lawful custody. He had been arrested, but then taken to and left at a local hospital. No officer stayed with him, and he later left and went home.
Held: His appeal succeeded. All the . .
CitedDhillon, Regina v CACD 23-Nov-2005
The defendant had been arrested and then taken to hospital for treatment. On completion of his treatment, he could not find the constable, so went home. He now appealed from conviction of escape contrary to common law.
Held: The prosecution . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.236330

Danyluk v Ainsworth Technologies Inc: 12 Jul 2001

Canlii (Supreme Court of Canada) Administrative law – Issue estoppel – Employee filing complaint against employer under Employment Standards Act seeking unpaid wages and commissions – Employee subsequently commencing court action against employer for wrongful dismissal and unpaid wages and commissions – Employment standards officer dismissing employee’s complaint – Employer arguing that employee’s claim for unpaid wages and commissions before court barred by issue estoppel – Whether officer’s failure to observe procedural fairness in deciding employee’s complaint preventing application of issue estoppel – Whether preconditions to application of issue estoppel satisfied – If so, whether this Court should exercise its discretion and refuse to apply issue estoppel.
Binney J said: ‘a decision which is made without jurisdiction from the outset cannot form the basis of an estoppel’

Judges:

Binney J

Citations:

[2001] 2 SCR 460, 2001 SCC 44

Links:

Canlii

Jurisdiction:

Canada

Cited by:

CitedFoster v Bon Groundwork Ltd EAT 17-Mar-2011
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Striking-out/dismissal
In April 2009, the Claimant, who was then 77 years of age, was employed by the Respondent, when he was laid off without pay. While still being employed by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Estoppel

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.430684

Regina v Hornbuckle: 1945

The defendant answered the charge of rape by saying that he had been drunk.
Held: Lowe J said: ‘To hold that knowledge that the act of intercourse was occurring sufficiently establishes the intent, [to have intercourse without consent] because the man who knows he is committing the act must intend it, even if prima facie warranted, seems to us to fail to distinguish ‘intent to have intercourse’ from ‘intent to have intercourse without ‘consent of the female’.’

Judges:

Lowe J

Citations:

(1945) VLR 281

Jurisdiction:

Australia

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Morgan HL 30-Apr-1975
The defendants appealed against their convictions for rape, denying mens rea and asserting a belief (even if mistaken) that the victim had consented.
Held: For a defence of mistake to succeed, the mistake must have been honestly made and need . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.258678

CLT v Connon and Others: 8 May 2000

Austlii (Supreme Court of South Australia) The father, the appellant, was accused of sexually abusing his three children. He sued for damages alleging negligence on the part of the medical practitioners who examined the children for signs of sexual abuse and on the part of the Department of Community Welfare who requested that police investigations be carried out and who took steps to ensure children were not returned to the care of the appellant – appellant’s relationship with his children significantly impaired – appellant conceded that previous decision of this Court in Hillman v Black could not be distinguished – Master considered himself bound by Hillman v Black and struck out claim as disclosing no cause of action. Whether recent High Court decisions dealing with the approach to be taken to duty of care require a reconsideration of Hillman v Black – whether duty of care was owed to appellant by medical practitioners and/or Department of Community Welfare when investigating and reporting the claims of sexual abuse. Gray J ‘Devastating consequences can follow an incorrect finding that a child has been sexually abused. Those consequences flow not only to the person against whom the findings are made, but also to the child and the family.’

Judges:

Gray J

Citations:

[2000] SASC 223

Links:

Austlii

Jurisdiction:

Australia

Cited by:

CitedJD v East Berkshire Community Health NHS Trust and others HL 21-Apr-2005
Parents of children had falsely and negligently been accused of abusing their children. The children sought damages for negligence against the doctors or social workers who had made the statements supporting the actions taken. The House was asked if . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Negligence, Health Professions

Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.224409

Kapeller v Rondalia Versekeringskorporasie van Suid-Afrika Bpk: 1964

(South Africa) A clear admission by an insurer of liability in the course of without prejudice negotiations about quantum was sufficient to restart the limitation period.

Citations:

1964 (4) SA 722 (T)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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

Litigation Practice, Limitation

Updated: 17 November 2022; Ref: scu.243131

Mann v Carnell: 21 Dec 1999

Austlii (High Court of Australia) Practice and procedure – Preliminary discovery – Legal professional privilege – Loss of privilege – Waiver by disclosure to third party.
Australian Capital Territory – Separation of powers – Representative government – Nature of relationship between the ACT Legislative Assembly and the ACT Executive.
Words and phrases – ‘client legal privilege’.
‘What brings about the waiver is the inconsistency, which the courts, where necessary informed by considerations of fairness, perceive, between the conduct of the client and maintenance of the confidentiality; not some over-riding principle of fairness operating at large. . Disclosure by a client of confidential legal advice received by the client, which may be for the purpose of explaining or justifying the client’s actions, or for some other purpose, will waive privilege if such disclosure is inconsistent with the confidentiality which the privilege serves to protect . . considerations of fairness may be relevant to a determination of whether there is such inconsistency.’

Judges:

Gleeson CJ, Gaudron, Gummow and Callinan JJJ

Citations:

[1999] HCA 66, [1999] 201 CLR 1, [1999] 168 ALR 86, [1999] 74 ALJR 378

Links:

Austlii

Jurisdiction:

Australia

Cited by:

CitedBrennan and others v Sunderland City Council Unison GMB EAT 16-Dec-2008
No Waiver for disclosure of Advice
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Admissibility of evidence
The claimant sought disclosure of certain legal advice on the basis that its effect, and a summary of its contents, had been put before the court and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Legal Professions, Litigation Practice

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.344013

Callachand and Another v State of Mauritius: PC 4 Nov 2008

(Mauritius) ‘In principle it seems to be clear that where a person is suspected of having committed an offence, is taken into custody and is subsequently convicted, the sentence imposed should be the sentence which is appropriate for the offence. It seems to be clear too that any time spent in custody prior to sentencing should be taken fully into account, not simply by means of a form of words but by means of an arithmetical deduction when assessing the length of the sentence that is to be served from the date of sentencing
Their Lordships recognise that there may be unusual cases where a defendant has deliberately delayed proceedings so as to ensure that a larger proportion of his sentence is spent as a prisoner on remand. In such a case it might be appropriate not to make what would otherwise be the usual order. Similarly a defendant who is in custody for more than one offence should not expect to be able to take advantage of time spent in custody more than once’

Judges:

Lord Hope of Craigadhe, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Carswell, Lord Mance, Sir Paul Kennedy

Citations:

[2008] UKPC 49, [2009] 4 LRC 777

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

CitedSherry v The Queen PC 4-Mar-2013
Discretion as to credit for remand time
(Guernsey) In 1980 the appellant had been sentenced to three months imprisonment. He had spent 10 days on remand, but no allowance was given for that time. He gave notice of appeal, but after being released on open remand, he failed to appear at his . .
CitedGomes v The State PC 25-Feb-2015
Trinidad and Tobago – Appeal against sentence – the sentencing court was said not to have allowed for the time spent by the defendant on remand pending extradition from England.
Held: The appeal failed. The judge had correctly exercised the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.471326

Cukurova Finance International Ltd and Another v Alfa Telecom Turkey Ltd: PC 30 Jan 2013

(British Virgin Islands) The claimant sought to recover shareholdings given in charge.
Held: There was an event of default, which entitled ATT to accelerate the loan and to appropriate – or forfeit – the charged shares, but that relief against forfeiture should be available to CH and CFI on appropriate conditions. Lord Neuberger giving the judgment of the Privy Council referred to the ‘title’ of the mortgagee in the following way: ‘In equity, a mortgagee has a limited title which is available only to secure satisfaction of the debt. The security is enforceable for that purpose and no other.’ and ‘any act by way of enforcement of the security (at least if it is purely) for a collateral purpose will be ineffective, at any rate as between mortgagor and mortgagee.’

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, Lord Mance, Lord Kerr, Lord Clarke, Lord Sumption

Citations:

[2013] UKPC 2

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary

Citing:

See AlsoCukurova Finance International Ltd and Another v Alfa Telecom Turkey Ltd PC 5-May-2009
(British Virgin Islands) Shares in two companies incorporated under the BVI Business Companies Act 2004, Cukurova Finance International Ltd and Cukurova Telecoms Holdings Ltd were provided as security under two sets of equitable mortgages, one set . .
See AlsoCukurova Finance International Ltd and Others v Alfa Telecom Turkey Ltd PC 23-May-2012
(British Virgin Islands) Interlocutory issue as to who should manage the affairs of the Turkcell mobile telephone business pending the Board’s final adjudication (after a hearing which should take place this autumn) on the rights and wrongs of what . .
CitedQuennell v Maltby CA 15-Nov-1978
A house was mortgaged to a bank. The house was then let to tenants at an annual rate of pounds 1,000. The tenants were protected as against the mortgagor by the Rent Acts. The tenancy was not binding on the bank. The mortgagor’s wife took a transfer . .

Cited by:

See AlsoCukurova Finance International Ltd and Another v Alfa Telecom Turkey Ltd PC 9-Jul-2013
British Virgin Islands . .
See AlsoCukurova Finance International Ltd and Another v Alfa Telecom Turkey Ltd PC 29-Jul-2013
(British Virgin Islands) . .
See AlsoCukurova Holding As v Sonera Holding Bv PC 13-May-2014
(British Virgin Islands) The appellant sought to have set aside the Final Decision of an arbitrator. . .
CitedThe Co-Operative Bank Plc v Phillips ChD 21-Aug-2014
The bank had brought possession proceedings against the defendant under two legal charges securing personal guarantees. The proceedings had been abandoned, but the court now was asked whether costs for the defendant should be on the standard or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Land, Equity

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.470677