Mckeown v The United Kingdom: ECHR 11 Jan 2011

The applicant alleged that his trial for terrorism related offences was unfair because of the way the courts in Northern Ireland had approached the question of non-disclosure of prosecution papers to the defence on grounds of public interest immunity.

Citations:

[2011] ECHR 22

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

See AlsoMcKeown v The United Kingdom ECHR 1-Apr-2008
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Criminal Practice, Northern Ireland

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.443850

Murray v The United Kingdom: ECHR 28 Oct 1994

The Army’s powers of arrest in Northern Ireland, did not breach the European Convention on Human Rights.

Judges:

Ryssdal, President

Citations:

Times 01-Nov-1994, 14310/88, [1994] ECHR 39, (1994) 19 EHRR 193

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

CitedA v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Dec-2004
The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they . .
CitedSecretary of State for the Home Department v AF AM and AN etc CA 17-Oct-2008
The claimants were subject to non-derogating control orders, being non EU nationals suspected of terrorism. They now said that they had not had a compatible hearing as to the issue of whether they were in fact involved in terrorist activity.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Northern Ireland, Armed Forces, Human Rights

Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.165336

Trunk Flooring Ltd v HSBC Asset Finance (Uk) Ltd: CANI 11 Nov 2015

Appeal by the second defendant from a decision acceding to the plaintiff respondent’s application for removal of a stay of proceedings granted to the appellant for referral of a dispute between the parties to arbitration.

Citations:

[2015] NICA 68

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Litigation Practice

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.560585

Regina v Clegg: HL 25 Jan 1995

The defendant was a soldier on patrol in Northern Ireland. He was convicted of the murder of the passenger and attempted murder of the driver of a stolen car. He said he had fired in self defence. The Court of Appeal had rejected his appeal saying that on the facts it had been a grossly excessive and disproportionate use of force. The House was asked: ‘whether a soldier on duty, who kills a
person with the requisite intention for murder, but who would be entitled to rely on self-defence but for the use of excessive force, is guilty of murder or manslaughter.’
Held: The use of grossly excessive force in self defence can be no justification for murder, even when the act was committed by a soldier on duty. The alternative of manslaughter was not available in such a case.

Judges:

Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead

Citations:

Gazette 22-Feb-1995, Independent 01-Feb-1995, Times 25-Jan-1995, [1995] UKHL 1, [1995] 1 All ER 334, [1995] 1 AC 482

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Law Act (Northern Ireland) 1967

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Citing:

MentionedRex v Cook 1640
The intent to resist unlawful apprehension is treated as a state of mind constituting ‘that lighter degree of malice which is necessary to the crime of manslaughter’ rather than murder. . .
CitedThe Queen v Howe 1958
High Court of Australia – Criminal Law – Murder – Conviction – Quashed on appeal to Supreme Court – New trial ordered – Appeal to High Court by Crown – Special leave – Questions of law affecting law of homicide – Importance – Self-defence – . .
CitedRegina v McInnes CACD 1971
Edmund Davies LJ said: ‘But where self-defence fails on the ground that force used went clearly beyond that which was reasonable in the light of the circumstances as they reasonably appeared to the accused, is it the law that the inevitable result . .
CitedPalmer v The Queen PC 23-Nov-1970
It is a defence in criminal law to a charge of assault if the defendant had an honest belief that he was going to be attacked and reacted with proportionate force: ‘If there has been an attack so that defence is reasonably necessary, it should be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Armed Forces

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.86397

In Re Coleman’s Application: CANI 1988

The court asked what was the result of a first instance hearing of a matter where it had incorrectly concluded the matter to be a criminal cause. Was it ultra vires?
Held: Lord Lowry CJ said: ‘It is an accepted maxim that nothing is to be intended out of the jurisdiction of the High Court except that which is expressly excluded from it. At common law the Court of Queen’s Bench, and subsequently the Queen’s Bench Division of the High Court, exercised the prerogative jurisdiction through a plurality of judges and there is nothing in section 16(5) which unequivocally dictates that that jurisdiction can now only be lawfully exercised by one judge, where it was formerly exercised by two or three judges, or even by the entire Bench as, for example, in R (Martin) v Mahony [1910] 2 IR 695.’

Judges:

Lord Lowry CJ

Citations:

[1988] NI 20

Statutes:

Judicature (Northern Ireland) Act 1978 16(5), Rules of the Supreme Court (Northern Ireland) 1980

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Cited by:

CitedAlexander, Farrelly and Others, Re Judicial Review QBNI 5-Mar-2009
Each claimant said that they had been wrongfully arrested, the arresting police officers having either failed to ask whether the arrest was necessary (Farrelly), or mistakenly concluding so.
Held: The Order now contained in regulation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.412282

Anderson v Hyde and Others: CANI 2 May 1996

The defendant company was wound up after the receiver had been appointed and the liquidator declined to take over the defence to the action. The judge had refused an application for a third party costs order against the receivers.
Held: Had the defence been taken over by the liquidator the costs of the claimant would have ranked in priority to the claims of ordinary unsecured creditors, and it would not be just and equitable for a receiver to be able to defend the action without any liability for costs whatever the outcome. A receiver of a company taking over the defence of a case is liable in costs as a party, but is entitled to an indemnity.

Citations:

Times 02-May-1996, [1996] 2 BCLC 144

Cited by:

CitedDolphin Quays Developments Ltd v Mills and others CA 17-May-2007
The owner had agreed to sell a long lease of an apartment to the defendant. Part of the price was to be by way of set off of an existing debt, but ths was not set out in the contract. The claimant bought the land and the benfit of the contract from . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Northern Ireland, Costs

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.77787

Regina v McNeill: CANI 1993

It is a basic principle that justice must be done in public, for all to see and hear, and all communications between counsel and judge should wherever possible be made in open court.

Citations:

[1993] NI 43

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Cited by:

CitedAttorney General’s Reference (No 3 of 2003) (Rogan) CANI 2001
The court discussed the need to take notes of meetings in chambers between the judge and counsel. The court set out four principles to be applied: ‘1. There should be freedom of access for counsel to judges, but that does not mean freedom to discuss . .
CitedRooney and Others, Re Attorney General’s Reference (Number 1 of 2005) CANI 11-Nov-2005
The defendants had been convicted or armed robbery. The Attorney General appealed against the sentences saying they were too lenient. Rooney argued that his plea of guilty had been after an indication by the judge and the reference was misguided. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.234987

Mulrine v University of Ulster: CANI 1993

An employee was employed under a contract of employment for 2 years with a waiver clause. 5 weeks before the end of that period the employer wrote to the employee, extending her contract by nearly 4 months and specifying that all other conditions of the contract were to remain.
Held: ‘In many cases the correct answer may be reached by applying the ‘Denning test’, but if as in this case, an unfair and unreasonable result is produced one must go back and ask the allegedly more difficult question : was the second contract an extension of the first?’ If an employer became liable to make an unfair dismissal payment by extending for a short period a contract under which the employee had surrendered her compensation rights would be a conclusion which would be: ‘irrational, unjust and contrary to the clear contractual terms into which the parties had chosen to enter.’ Sir Brian Hutton LCJ: it was clear as a matter of construction that the employee was not employed under a new and separate contract when the original contract was extended but that she was employed under a contract for a fixed term of two years which was extended or renewed to make it a fixed term of two years, three months and three weeks. It was unreasonable and unjust to hold that because of the extension the employer lost the benefit of the exclusion clause which would have operated to protect it if the employment had ended on the expiry of the term of two years.

Judges:

MacDermott LJ, Sir Brian Hutton LCJ

Citations:

[1993] IRLR 545

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Citing:

CitedBBC v Ioannou CA 1975
Mr I was employed on a 3-year contract determinable on notice. The contract was renewed by a 2-year extension, followed by a one-year extension, and a waiver clause was agreed for the latter extension. The statute required the fixed term to be of . .

Cited by:

CitedBritish Broadcasting Corporation v Kelly-Phillips CA 24-Apr-1998
When a one year fixed term employment contract was extended by a period of less than a year, but then not again renewed, there was no unfair dismissal, since the exemption for the original term applied also to any extension. There had been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Northern Ireland

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.198055

Re M’s application: CANI 2004

The court spoke of the practical need for a power for a school to suspend as a precautionary measure: ‘We consider that it is entirely proper for a principal to suspend a pupil who may face the prospect of expulsion if the allegations made against him are substantiated for the purpose of having the case against the pupil explored. One need only instance a simple example to demonstrate the inevitability of that conclusion. If a pupil was alleged to have assaulted a teacher, it would be inconceivable that the principal should not be able to suspend the pupil pending a full investigation of the incident or a final decision as to what the ultimate punishment should be.’

Judges:

Kerr LCJ, Nicholson and Campbell LJJ

Citations:

[2004] NICA 32

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Cited by:

CitedJR17 for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) SC 23-Jun-2010
The appellant was excluded from school. A female pupil related her fear of him to a teacher, but would not make a formal complaint, and the appellant was not to be told of the report or the investigation of it. There was said to have been confusion . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Education

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.417818

Armagh District Council v Fair Employment Agency: CANI 1983

The court considered an allegation of discrimination made as to the appointment of a wages clerk by a district council.
Held: Lord Lowry said: ‘It must not be forgotten that when the Act uses the word ‘discrimination or ‘discriminate’ it is referring to an employer who makes a choice between one candidate and another on the ground of religious belief or political opinion; it is not speaking of an incidental disadvantage which is due to a difference between the religion of the employer and of the candidate but of a deliberate, intentional action on the part of the appointing body or individual.
Here I must dispose of a misleading argument which was raised before the learned county court judge but not seriously pursued in this court. An action may be deliberate without being malicious. Most acts of discrimination are both, but the only essential quality is deliberation. If a Protestant employer does not engage a Roman Catholic applicant because he genuinely believes that the applicant will not be able to get on with Protestant fellow workmen, he is discriminating against the applicant on the ground of his religious belief, although that employer’s motives may be above reproach. If women are allowed to stop work five minutes early in order to avoid being endangered when the day’s work ends, it has been decided that the men in the workforce are discriminated against on the ground that they are men. The employer’s decision to keep the men at work longer, though reached in good faith, was deliberately based on the fact that they were men.
Accordingly, it can be stated that, although malice (while often present) is not essential, deliberate intention to differentiate on the ground of religion, politics, sex, colour or nationality (whatever is aimed at by the legislation) is an indispensable element in the concept of discrimination. The distinction is sometimes expressed as one between motive and intention. In Peake v. Automotive Products Ltd. [1977] Q.B. 780, the case about releasing women early from their work, Phillips J. stated, at p. 787: ‘it seems to us that [counsel] is confusing the motive or the purpose of the act complained of with the factual nature of the act itself. Section 1(1)(a) requires one to look to see what in fact is done amounting to less favourable treatment and whether it is done to the man or the woman because he, is, a man or a woman. If so, it is of no relevance that it is done with no discriminatory motive.’ This idea runs through all the cases.’

Judges:

Lowry LJ

Citations:

[1983] NI 346

Statutes:

Fair Employment (Northern Ireland) Act 1976 16(2)

Northern Ireland, Discrimination

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.264031

Regina v Thompson: 1977

The court considered the procedure of a criminal trial by judge alone in Northern Ireland: ‘[The judge] has no jury to charge and therefore will not err if he does not state every relevant legal proposition and review every fact and argument on either side. His duty is not as in a jury trial to instruct laymen as to every relevant aspect of the law or to give (perhaps at the end of a long trial) a full and balanced picture of the facts for decision by others. His task is to reach conclusions and give reasons to support his view and, preferably, to notice any difficult or unusual points of law in order that if there is an appeal it can be seen how his view of the law informs his approach to the facts.’ Leave to appeal was refused.

Judges:

Sir Robert Lowry CJ

Citations:

[1977] NI 74

Cited by:

CitedChristian and others v The Queen PC 30-Oct-2006
(The Pitcairn Islands) The defendants appealed convictions for assorted sexual offences against underage girls. They denied that the laws under which they were convicted had applied to the Pitcairn Islands.
Held: The appeals against conviction . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.245768

Regina v HM Attorney-General for Northern Ireland and Another Ex Parte Devine: CANI 1992

An inquest was held into three deaths thought to be at the hands of British soldiers. The coroner had admitted written evidence from statements taken by British officers on the basis that the makers of the statements were not compellable as witnesses.
Held: Judicial review of the coroner’s decision was refused.
Hutton LJ said: ‘in Nash’s case the Court of Appeal was strongly influenced by the consideration that at that time a highway authority was not responsible for nonfeasance. Therefore the court considered that it was not the intention of Parliament to make a highway authority liable for an accident where that highway authority was not guilty of misfeasance but only of nonfeasance. Accordingly the court interpreted the word liabilities in such a way as not to make the rural district council responsible in damages for a danger which it did not itself create.’
and ‘We accept counsel’s submissions that for the two reasons which he advanced the statements of soldiers A, B and C do not come within the ambit of Rule 17. But we reject his other submission that Rule 17 applies to all documentary evidence and that as the statements do not fall within it the rule prohibits their admission in evidence. We consider that Rule 17 only applies to the type of document described in paragraph (1) viz a document where ‘a coroner considers that the attendance as a witness by the maker of the document is unnecessary’ . . In other words the document appears to the coroner to be formal and uncontroversial. The statements of A, B and C are clearly not such documents and therefore Rule 17 does not apply to them. Accordingly, Rule 17 does not abrogate the ordinary rule that it was open to the coroner to admit the statements, notwithstanding that they were hearsay.’

Judges:

Hutton LJ

Citations:

(1992) NI 74

Statutes:

Coroners (Practice and Procedure) Rules (NI) 1980 17

Citing:

CitedNash v Rochford Rural District Council CA 1917
A claim was made against the local highway authority for personal injury resulting from the defective construction of a highway drain. The plaintiff failed to prove that the defendant highway authority had been responsible for the construction of . .
CitedMcKerr v Armagh Coroner HL 1990
It is for the coroner to decide how to adduce the necessary evidence as to death. Lord Goff discussed Rule 17 of the 1980 Rules: ‘Nor, in my opinion, does the mere fact that a rule restricts the power of a coroner as to the evidence which he may . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromRegina v HM Attorney-General for Northern Ireland and Another Ex Parte Devine, Same Ex Parte Breslin HL 1-Apr-1992
The Coroner had held an inquest into the deaths of three persons who had been shot by soldiers. The Coroner had admitted statements made by the soldiers under Rule 17 of the Northern Ireland Rules. Those statements had been produced in evidence by . .
CitedNational Grid Gas Plc, Regina (on the Application of) v The Environment Agency Admn 17-May-2006
The claimant sought a judicial review of the decision to hold them responsible for necessary works of remediation. They were statutory successors to British Gas Corporation.
Held: The legislation clearly attempted to hold the contaminator . .
CitedAssistant Deputy Coroner of Inner West London v Paul and Another, Regina on the Application of CA 28-Nov-2007
The coroner appealed a judicial review granted after he allowed into evidence, hearsay evidence contained in a written statemnent from a witness who could not attend the inquest.
Held: Rule 37 does not allow the admission of a document, even . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Coroners

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.242438

Commissioner of Valuation for Northern Ireland v Fermanagh Protestant Board of Education: CA 1965

Citations:

[1960] 24 HLR 605

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Cited by:

CitedHughes and Hughes v Greenwich London Borough Council CA 1992
The applicant was headmaster of a boarding school. The contract of employment did not require him to occupy the house, but a new house was built for the headmaster and he moved into it. It was not necessary for him to occupy the house for his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.183484

Attorney General’s Reference No. 1 of 1991: CANI 1991

The court discussed the use of concurrent sentences: ‘we do not consider that there is a principle that a trial judge necessarily errs if he imposes concurrent and not consecutive sentences. Moreover, we consider that in Northern Ireland concurrent sentences are imposed more frequently than in England. We are of opinion that it would be undesirable in this jurisdiction to limit the discretion of the trial judge as to whether he should impose concurrent or consecutive sentence. The over-riding concern must be that the total global sentence, whether made up of concurrent or consecutive sentences, must be appropriate. In some cases a judge may achieve this result more satisfactorily by imposing consecutive sentences. In other cases he may achieve it more satisfactorily by imposing concurrent sentences . . We stress that, whether the sentences are concurrent or consecutive, the over-riding and important consideration is that the total global sentence should be just and appropriate.’

Judges:

Hutton LCJ

Citations:

[1991] NI 218

Cited by:

CitedRooney and Others, Re Attorney General’s Reference (Number 1 of 2005) CANI 11-Nov-2005
The defendants had been convicted or armed robbery. The Attorney General appealed against the sentences saying they were too lenient. Rooney argued that his plea of guilty had been after an indication by the judge and the reference was misguided. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.234986

Re McKiernan’s Application: 1985

The court found difficulty in drawing a logical distinction between the disciplinary functions of governors and Boards of Visitors.

Citations:

[1985] NI 385

Cited by:

CitedAl-Hasan, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Feb-2005
Prisoners were disciplined after refusing to be squat searched, saying that the procedure was humiliating and that there were no reasonable grounds to suspect them of any offence against prison discipline. The officer who had been involved in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Prisons

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.222930

McFarlane v McFarlane: CANI 1972

The parties disputed their respective shares in the family home. The facts in Pettitt and Gissing ‘were not such as to facilitate or encourage a comprehensive statement of this vexed branch of the law’ and ‘much remains unsettled.’ The court reviewed the two cases: ‘two points were put beyond question. The ‘family assets’ doctrine was definitely rejected. See Pettitt per Lord Reid, per Lord Hodson, and per Lord Upjohn. And, secondly, section 17 of the Act of 1882 was held only to be a procedural provision which did not empower the court to alter the existing rights of the parties. See per Lord Reid . . per Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest . . per Lord Hodson . . per Lord Upjohn . . And per Lord Diplock.
These decisions, as I understand them, have also established or affirmed two rather less negative propositions of law to which I must now refer. The first is that, in the absence of proof to the contrary, a spouse who acquired the legal title to property purchased with the aid of a substantial monetary contribution from the other spouse will hold the property subject to a beneficial interest therein belonging to the other spouse; see Pettitt, per Lord Reid at page 749B, per Lord Hodson at p 810G, per Lord Upjohn at p 815 G-H; and Gissing per Lord Pearson at p 264G-265B. This may be the result of some binding agreement between the spouses; but more usually it will flow from a resulting trust in favour of the contributing spouse who has not the legal title. The extent of the beneficial interests will depend on the circumstances. They will not necessarily be equal, but may be held so where that conclusion accords with the broad merits of the respective claims or with what is fair and reasonable when there is some difficulty or uncertainty in assessing the contributions: see Rimmer v Rimmer [1953] 1 QB 63. The second proposition which I take to be now accepted in Pettitt and Gissing must be stated in a qualified form. It is that in certain circumstances the first proposition can also apply in favour of the spouse without the legal title where that spouse has contributed to the purchase, not directly by finding a part of the price, but indirectly and in a manner which has added to the resources out of which the property has been acquired as, for example, by work done or services rendered or by relieving the other spouse of some, at any rate, of his or her financial obligations.’

Judges:

Lord MacDermott, Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland

Citations:

[1972] NI 59

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Citing:

CitedRimmer v Rimmer 1953
Where it is not possible for a court to identify the precise contributions made by partners to a property, the court may take a view that ‘They will not necessarily be equal, but may be held so where that conclusion accords with the broad merits of . .
CitedGissing v Gissing HL 7-Jul-1970
Evidence Needed to Share Benefical Inerests
The family home had been purchased during the marriage in the name of the husband only. The wife asserted that she had a beneficial interest in it.
Held: The principles apply to any case where a beneficial interest in land is claimed by a . .
CitedPettitt v Pettitt HL 23-Apr-1969
A husband and wife disputed ownership of the matrimonial home in the context of the presumption of advancement.
Lord Reid said: ‘These considerations have largely lost their force under present conditions, and, unless the law has lost its . .

Cited by:

ApprovedOxley v Hiscock CA 6-May-2004
The parties were not married, but had brought together their resources to purchase a home in the name of one of them. Nothing had been said about the respective shares on which the property was to be held.
Held: The shares were to be assessed . .
CitedStack v Dowden HL 25-Apr-2007
The parties had cohabited for a long time, in a home bought by Ms Dowden. After the breakdown of the relationship, Mr Stack claimed an equal interest in the second family home, which they had bought in joint names. The House was asked whether, when . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Trusts

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.199947

National and Provincial v William and Humphrey: 1996

Girvan J said: ‘If a mortgagor declines to put any material before the court which could lay a basis for the court exercising its powers under s36 the mortgagee would be entitled to his remedy based on his clear contractual rights under the mortgage. It is for a mortgagor to adduce some justification or basis to enable the court to exercise its discretionary power under s36 in his favour. A mortgagor who is in default under his mortgage has no right to demand that the court exercises its discretion in his favour to grant what is in effect a form of relief against the consequences of a breach of contract . . A mortgagor seeking to persuade the court to exercise its powers under s36 should be expected to put before the court his best realistic proposals to avoid the consequences of his breach of the contractual terms of the mortgage . .’

Judges:

Girvan J

Citations:

[1996] NI 47

Statutes:

Administration of Justice Act 1973 36

Cited by:

CitedSantander (UK) Plc v Parker CANI 16-Jun-2015
Appeal by Mr Parker against the judgment dismissing Mr Parker’s appeal against the Order of Master Bell refusing a stay on possession by Santander (UK) PLC of the appellant’s dwelling house.
Held: A promissory note was equivalent to cash, but . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Banking

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.550147

Regina v Delaney: 1994

The court should be very slow to impose what it regards as anything other than the right sentence simply because it or another court has imposed a ‘wrong’ sentence on a co-defendant: ‘The principle served by this approach is that where right thinking members of the public looking at the respective sentences would say that something had gone wrong the court should step in . . It should not be supposed, however, that the court will be prepared to invoke the principle and make the reduction unless there is a really marked disparity, for unless that condition is satisfied it will not regard any sense of grievance felt by an appellant as having sufficient justification. It is only if a fair-minded and right-thinking person would feel that the disparity involved some unfairness to the appellant, as distinct from a possibly rueful feeling that his associate has been more fortunate in his treatment, that a court should intervene.’

Judges:

Hutton LCJ

Citations:

[1994] NIJB 31

Cited by:

CitedO’Brien and others v Independent Assessor HL 14-Mar-2007
The claimants had been wrongly imprisoned for a murder they did not commit. The assessor had deducted from their compensation a sum to represent the living costs they would have incurred if living freely. They also appealed differences from a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.250035

Chief Constable of the RUC v A: CANI 2000

The court set down tests for what was ‘less favourable treatment’ under the Act. The court had to regard as relevant those circumstances on which a reasonable person would place some weight in determining how to treat another.

Judges:

Carswell LCJ

Citations:

[2000] NI 261

Statutes:

Fair Employment (Northern Ireland) Act 1976

Cited by:

CitedShamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary HL 27-Feb-2003
The applicant was a chief inspector of police. She had been prevented from carrying out appraisals of other senior staff, and complained of sex discrimination.
Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. The tribunal had taken a two stage approach. It . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Discrimination

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.207076

Regina v Bailey: CANI 1956

Lord MacDermott LCJ said that the administration of public justice: ‘comprehends functions that nowadays belong, in practice almost exclusively, to the police, such as the investigation of offences and the arrest of suspected persons.’

Judges:

Lord MacDermott LCJ

Citations:

(1956) NI 15

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Cotter and Others CACD 10-May-2002
The defendants appealed against convictions for conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. They said that the fact that an investigation followed a false allegation was insufficient to found a complaint, and that the extent of the crime was so . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.181079

Re Molloy’s Application: CANI 1998

Judges:

Carswell LCJ

Citations:

[1998] NI 78

Citing:

CitedRegina v Derby Crown Court, ex parte Brooks QBD 1985
The court set out the characteristics of abuse of process in criminal matters. It may be an abuse of process if: ‘the prosecution have manipulated or misused the process of the court so as to deprive the defendant of a protection provided by the law . .
CitedRegina v Brentford Justices Ex parte Wong QBD 1981
The defendant had been involved in a traffic accident. Very shortly before the expiry of the six month time limit, the prosecutor issued a careless driving summons apparently in order to preserve the possibility of a prosecution without yet having . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Northern Ireland

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.263209

Re McGuigan’s Application: 1994

Citations:

[1994] NI 143

Cited by:

CitedTweed v Parades Commission for Northern Ireland HL 13-Dec-2006
(Northern Ireland) The applicant sought judicial review of a decision not to disclose documents held by the respondent to him saying that the refusal was disproportionate and infringed his human rights. The respondents said that the documents were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Judicial Review

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.247414

Regina v Coates: CANI 1998

The Court dismissed an appeal against a sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment imposed for armed robbery of almost andpound;9,000 from a bank: ‘Armed robbery at banks is a growing form of criminal activity and the efforts of the courts to deter do not appear to be achieving appreciable success. Accordingly we are satisfied that the present situation requires us to . . to affirm that 15 years is the correct starting point when seeking to sentence a prisoner convicted of armed robbery . . that figure will, of course, be varied to reflect relevant aggravating and mitigating factors.’

Judges:

MacDermott LJ

Citations:

Unreported, 1998

Cited by:

CitedRooney and Others, Re Attorney General’s Reference (Number 1 of 2005) CANI 11-Nov-2005
The defendants had been convicted or armed robbery. The Attorney General appealed against the sentences saying they were too lenient. Rooney argued that his plea of guilty had been after an indication by the judge and the reference was misguided. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 07 May 2022; Ref: scu.234983

Reilly (J M) v Belfast Corporation: 1970

Citations:

[1970] NI 68

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Cited by:

CitedHughes and Another v Greenwich London Borough Council HL 26-Oct-1993
A headmaster’s occupation of a house in the school was not ‘for the better performance of his duties’, and so was not a tied house, and so he had the right to buy it. A term could not be implied into his contract to require him to occupy the house. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.183487

Regina v Secretary of State ex parte Toner and Walsh: NIQB 1997

The claimants sought damages saying that the respondent had infringed their human rights in removing their right to vote in an election whilst serving prison sentences.

Citations:

[1997] NIQB 18

Cited by:

CitedTovey and Others v Ministry of Justice QBD 18-Feb-2011
The claimants, serving prisoners, sought damages saying that the refusal to allow them to vote was in infringement of their human rights. The large numbers of claims had been consolidated in London. The claimant sought to withdraw his claim.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Human Rights, Prisons, Elections

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.430458

Morrow v Morrow: 1995

While it may be uncommon, the fact that a claimant stands to inherit whatever may fall into the actual death estate does not preclude an order being made under sections 10 and 2 in her favour.

Judges:

Campbell J

Citations:

[1995] NIJB 46

Statutes:

Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 10 13

Cited by:

CitedDellal v Dellal and Others FD 1-Apr-2015
The families disputed a claim under the 1975 Act. The defendants now sought summary dismissal of the claim. . .
CitedK v K FD 21-Apr-2015
F and M had been involved in protracted and bitter litigation on their divorce. They had come each to seek the committal of the other for alleged perjury and otherwise, but those applications were not being pursued.
Held: The father’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Wills and Probate, Northern Ireland

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.545895

Regina v Foxford: CANI 1974

The Crown in opening its case said that it would call two witnesses, but did not do so and only tendered them for cross-examination. That cross-examination produced evidence favourable to the defence, and the witnesses were then re- examined by the Crown, querying their evidence. The court was asked as to the production of previous statements made by Crown witnesses.
Held: That should not have been allowed. If the facts relating to the making of the statements were unusual that would justify the trial judge in directing the prosecution to furnish the statements to the defence although it remained a matter of discretion for him and the Court of Appeal would rarely interfere. Otherwise the trial judge had to rely on the Crown’s discretion and propriety. The defence cannot inspect the statement of a prosecution witness but the Crown ought to offer the statement to the defence if it is materially at variance with the evidence given in Court.
The re-examination had been irregular on four grounds:
(I) because re-examination was only to clear up points raised in cross- examination, and no new material could be introduced;
(ii) because leading questions must not be asked;
(iii) because cross-examination is not permissible; and
(iv) because unless the witness has proved hostile, and the judge has granted leave, a party may not attack his own witness’ version of what had happened.
Lowry LCJ spoke also as to the difficulties arising from a procedure in which the judge of law was also the tribunal of fact.

Judges:

Lowry LCJ

Citations:

[1974] NI 181

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Livingstone CANI 25-Jun-2013
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder, saying that police officers had fabricated a confession, and had severely mistreated another detainee to concoct further evidence.
Held: The appeal was allowed. Had the material . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Criminal Practice

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.535595

Regina (Caherty) v Belfast Justices: 1978

Section 7 of the 1945 Act provides that a person charged in Northern Ireland with the commission of indictable offence may be proceeded against in any county or place in which (a) he is apprehended; (b) he is in custody in relation to the offence; or (c) he appears to answer a summons lawfully issued charging the offence. In such circumstances the offence will be deemed to have been committed in the relevant county or place.
Held: The section conferred the necessary jurisdiction to proceed.

Citations:

[1978] NI 94

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 1945 791)

Cited by:

CitedMorgan, Re Judicial Review QBNI 15-Jan-2014
The applicant sought leave to bring judicial review of a prosecutor’s decision to lay a complaint before the magistrates alleging offences associated with an allegation of conspiracy to rob. He said that the decision fell foul of the requirement . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Criminal Practice

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.520924

Gallagher v Lynn: PC 1936

Section 4 of the 1920 Act provided that the Parliament of Northern Ireland had power to make laws for the peace, order and good government of Northern Ireland, but not to make laws in respect of, among other things, trade with any place out of Northern Ireland. Challenge was made to the 1934 Act which purported to regulate the supply of milk in Northern Ireland which imposed controls on every person who within Northern Ireland sold or exposed for sale milk, whether produced within or without the territory of Northern Ireland.
Held: The Act was a law for the peace, order and good government of Northern Ireland in respect of precautions taken to secured the health of its inhabitants, not a law in respect of trade.
Lord Atkin went on to explain the ‘pith and substance doctrine’, saying: ‘These questions affecting limitation on the legislative powers of subordinate parliaments or the distribution of powers between parliaments in a federal system are now familiar, and I do not propose to cite the whole range of authority which has largely arisen in discussion of the powers of Canadian Parliaments. It is well established that you are to look at the ‘true nature and character of the legislation’ . . ‘the pith and substance of the legislation.’ If, on the view of the statute as a whole, you find that the substance of the legislation is within the express powers, then it is not invalidated if incidentally it affects matters which are outside the authorized field. The legislation must not under the guise of dealing with one matter in fact encroach upon the forbidden field. Nor are you to look only at the object of the legislator. An Act may have a perfectly lawful object, eg to promote the health of the inhabitants, but may seek to achieve that object by invalid methods, eg a direct prohibition of any trade with a foreign country.’

Judges:

Lord Atkin

Citations:

[1937] AC 863

Statutes:

Government of Ireland Act 1920, Milk and Milk Products Act (Northern Ireland) Act 1934

Citing:

CitedCharles Russell v The Queen PC 23-Jun-1882
(New Brunswick) The defendant had been convicted of unlawfully selling intoxicating Licquor contrary to the 1878 Act. He challenged his conviction saying that the Act had been outwith the powers of the Parliament of Canada as provided for by the . .

Cited by:

CitedImperial 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.

Constitutional, Northern Ireland, Agriculture

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.468810

Regina v Murphy and Another: CANI 1990

The two defendants were tried for the murder of two British Army corporals. The prosecution adduced the evidence of a number of television journalists who, in the course of their work, had filmed the scene of the killing. The judge gave leave that these witnesses should not be identified by name and that, when giving evidence, they might be screened so that their faces should be seen only by the judge and the lawyers on each side, but not by the defendants or the public. The defendants appealed the order.
Held: The order was approved.

Citations:

[1990] NI 306

Citing:

CitedAttorney-General v Butterworth CA 1962
The court considered the penalisation of a witness who had given evidence in contempt of the court.
It would be a contempt for someone to threaten or interfere with a witness in order to deter them from giving evidence or in order to persuade . .
CitedRegina v Socialist Worker Printers and Publishers Ltd, Ex parte Attorney-General CA 1974
In a blackmail case, the court ordered non publication of the names of the complainants. Thinking they were not bound, the defendants published the names.
Held: The publishers and Mr Michael Foot were held to be in contempt of court in . .
CitedAttorney-General v Leveller Magazine Ltd HL 1-Feb-1979
The appellants were magazines and journalists who published, after committal proceedings, the name of a witness, a member of the security services, who had been referred to as Colonel B during the hearing. An order had been made for his name not to . .

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Davis HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant had been tried for the murder of two men by shooting them at a party. He was identified as the murderer by three witnesses who had been permitted to give evidence anonymously, from behind screens, because they had refused, out of fear, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.270015

Doherty (suing as personal representative of Daniel Doherty deceased) v Ministry of Defence: CANI 5 Feb 1991

In a civil action against army personnel, the defendant ministry applied that military witnesses should be screened while giving evidence so as to protect their identities. They were also to be identified by letters, not names, but the claimant raised no objection to that.
Held: The evidence to be given by these military witnesses would be ‘directly detrimental to the plaintiff’s case’, and the claimant must not lose the advantage of being able to cross examine them face to face.
Sir Brian Hutton CJ said: ‘I think it appropriate to observe that, in my opinion, counsel for the Ministry in his submissions accorded insufficient recognition to the importance of counsel being able to cross-examine, face to face, an important witness giving evidence on a vital issue in dispute between the parties. Where issues are in dispute between the parties unimpeded cross-examination plays a vital part in the trial and gives vital assistance to the due administration of justice. I consider that counsel would be impeded in the cross-examination of a witness, whose evidence he wished to challenge, if he could not see his face fully, and I find it difficult to envisage circumstances in which the interests of justice would require that the face of a vital witness giving evidence on an important matter in dispute should be screened from counsel cross-examining him.’
Higgins J said: ‘Mr Kerr in his submission on behalf of the Ministry of Defence questioned the importance of a lawyer appearing in a trial being able to see the witnesses for the opposing side give evidence, even when their evidence is crucial and disputed. I think that in a contested case it is essential that the lawyer for one party should be able to see the demeanour of each witness, called by the other side to give evidence of any importance; to prevent him from viewing such a witness would be a hindrance to his cross-examination.
The exposure of witnesses, even when giving uncontroversial evidence, to the view of the lawyers in the case has been the invariable practice in the common law system of administering justice. It has been one of the features which has contributed to the maintenance of public confidence in the administration of justice. To depart from it in any circumstance, unless there has been consent, would, I consider, diminish public confidence.
The Ministry is seeking to have four witnesses at the trial of this case screened from the sight of all but the trial judge. Those witnesses would be giving evidence in support of the defence of reasonable force, which is likely to be challenged strongly. It is my opinion that to permit, for no matter how compelling a reason, any of those witnesses to be cut off, while in the witness-box, from the view of the plaintiff’s lawyers, would be an unacceptable departure from the fundamental principles which govern the conduct of trials throughout the United Kingdom.’

Judges:

Sir Brian Hutton CJ, Higgins J

Citations:

Unreported, 5 February 1991

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Davis HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant had been tried for the murder of two men by shooting them at a party. He was identified as the murderer by three witnesses who had been permitted to give evidence anonymously, from behind screens, because they had refused, out of fear, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Northern Ireland

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.270018

Regina v Murphy: CMAC 1965

(Courts-Martial Appeal Court of Northern Ireland) The court has a discretion to exclude the evidence of an agent provocateur.

Citations:

[1965] NI 138

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Sang HL 25-Jul-1979
The defendant appealed against an unsuccessful application to exclude evidence where it was claimed there had been incitement by an agent provocateur.
Held: The appeal failed. There is no defence of entrapment in English law. All evidence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Armed Forces, Northern Ireland

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.250472

Regina v O’Neill: CANI 1984

The court gave sentencing guidelines for offences of robbery. Gibson LJ said: ‘In circumstances such as obtain nowadays in Northern Ireland where firearms are frequently used to rob banks and post offices this Court would re-affirm that a sentence of 13 years or upwards should not now be considered outside the norm for a deterrent sentence for this type of offence. Indeed, it would be appropriate for a judge to regard a sentence within the range of 10 to 13 years as a starting point for consideration, which sentences may be increased if there is a high degree of planning and organisation, or if force is actually used, or if the accused has been involved in more than one such crime. Equally it would be appropriate to reduce the sentence if the degree of preparation or the efficiency of performance is low, or if the money and weapons have been recovered, or if the accused has shown contrition and pleaded guilty to the charge, or if there are other special features which ought to be treated as grounds for reduction of the penalty.’

Judges:

Gibson LJ

Citations:

[1984] 13 NIJB

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Colhoun CANI 1988
The Court affirmed a sentence of 10 years imprisonment for the armed robbery of andpound;50 from a small shop: ‘Since the judgment of this court in R -v- O’Neill there has been no diminution in the number of armed robberies. They are very serious . .
CitedRooney and Others, Re Attorney General’s Reference (Number 1 of 2005) CANI 11-Nov-2005
The defendants had been convicted or armed robbery. The Attorney General appealed against the sentences saying they were too lenient. Rooney argued that his plea of guilty had been after an indication by the judge and the reference was misguided. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.234981

M v M: FDNi 20 Dec 2001

The court considered the approach to the evaluation of contributions in ancillary relief proceedings in a divorce where there were substantial assets. McLaughlin J said: ‘In the course of adducing evidence before me counsel sought to tempt me with a bait of this kind. He led evidence, and relied upon it in his closing submissions, that the husband worked very long hours getting out of bed at 6.00am to be at work by 7.00am. His work did not finish until late in the evening as he carried on his working day by supervising Y limited and the other business premises owned by the company. I accept all of that evidence as true, but to concentrate on that and fail to recognise that, whilst he toiled at work on company business, Mrs M from early in the morning was getting the children ready for school, taking them there, running the home during the day, collecting them after school, cooking and cleaning, nurturing them by ferrying them to social, sporting and recreational activities, supervising homework and tutoring them when required, would be to be guilty of the very kind of discrimination warned against by Lord Nicholls. An example of the value of the life’s work of Mrs M can be seen today in the accomplishments and personalities of their children. These are the abiding rewards of her labour of love rather than the transient rewards in the form of money produced by the labour of the husband. In the context of this family’s life these admirable qualities of both parties are to be considered of equal value. Indeed the words of Lord Nicholls might almost have been written to describe the respective roles of Mr and Mrs M.’

Judges:

McLaughlin J

Citations:

Unreported, 20 December 2001

Citing:

See AlsoMaginn v Maginn FdNI 21-Jun-2001
. .

Cited by:

CitedLambert v Lambert CA 14-Nov-2002
The parties appealed an order for the division of the family’s 20 million pound fortune on divorce. The husband argued that his special contribution to the creation of the wealth meant that he should receive a greater share.
Held: The Act gave . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Northern Ireland

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.235255

Regina v Hogg and others: CANI 1994

The court considered sentences for the importation of drugs: ‘1. Importation of drugs on a large scale is the most serious offence in this area, and is invariably to be visited with a substantial custodial sentence. We respectfully agree with the guidelines set out by Lane CJ in R v Aramah (1982) 4 Cr App R (S) 407.
2. Supplying drugs is the next in descending order of gravity, with possession with intent to supply a short distance behind. In many cases there may be little distinction between them, for the charge may depend on the stage of the proceedings at which the defendant was apprehended. In all but exceptional cases they will attract an immediate custodial sentence, which may range from one of some months in the case of a small quantity of Class B drugs to one of four or five years or more in the case of supply of appreciable commercial quantities of Class A drugs. We do not find it possible to narrow the range any more closely, for much will depend on the circumstances of the supply, its scale, frequency and duration, the sums of money involved and the defendant’s previous record, together with his or her individual circumstances.’

Citations:

[1994] NI 258

Cited by:

CitedAttorney General’s Reference (Number 8 of 2004) (Dawson and Others) CANI 15-Apr-2005
Defendants had been convicted of offences involving supply of cannabis and cocaine, including the evasion of import controls and conspiracy. The sentences were appealed as too lenient.
Held: Where a prosecutor was aware that a plea of guilty . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.224215

Regina v McIlwaine: CANI 1998

The court dismissed an appeal against a sentence of four years imprisonment for possession of 9.88 kilos of cannabis resin with a street value of andpound;100,000: ‘So we return to the question-was this sentence manifestly excessive? We are satisfied that it was not. Even allowing for the early guilty plea we would not have interfered with a five-year sentence. This was a substantial quantity of cannabis, no assistance was given to the police by the appellant who already had a relevant conviction. We would repeat yet again-those who offend in this way will on conviction receive lengthy custodial sentences. The public is entitled to be protected from the evil of drug abuse and it is the duty of judges in this jurisdiction to make it clear that they will seek to discourage anyone from participating in that trade.’

Judges:

MacDermott LJ

Citations:

[1998] NI 136

Cited by:

CitedAttorney General’s Reference (Number 8 of 2004) (Dawson and Others) CANI 15-Apr-2005
Defendants had been convicted of offences involving supply of cannabis and cocaine, including the evasion of import controls and conspiracy. The sentences were appealed as too lenient.
Held: Where a prosecutor was aware that a plea of guilty . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.224217

Regina v Fitzpatrick: CANI 1977

The court considered the defence of duress: ‘A person may become associated with a sinister group of men with criminal objectives and coercive methods of ensuring that their lawless enterprises are carried out and thereby voluntarily expose himself to illegal compulsion, whether or not the group is or becomes a proscribed organisation . . if a person voluntarily exposes and submits himself, as the appellant did, to illegal compulsion, he cannot rely on the duress to which he has voluntarily exposed himself as an excuse either in respect of the crimes he commits against his will or in respect of his continued but unwilling association with those capable of exercising upon him the duress which he calls in aid.’

Judges:

Lowry LCJ

Citations:

[1977] NI 20

Cited by:

CitedHasan, Regina v HL 17-Mar-2005
The House was asked two questions: the meaning of ‘confession’ for the purposes of section 76(1) of the 1984 Act, and as to the defence of duress. The defendant had been involved in burglary, being told his family would be harmed if he refused. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Crime

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.223668

Re Baker and other Applicants: QBNI 1992

The court considered the meaning of the Prisons Rules, and the ability of a governor to order searches of prisoners: ‘the power conferred by Rule 9(1) is intended to be an unqualified power, and the governor is entitled to order a prisoner to be searched whenever he sees fit, subject only to contrary direction of the Secretary of State. It would, I think, be inconsistent with the position of a prisoner lawfully confined in a prison to import a qualification into the power of search which would permit him or her to decide whether the search order was validly given and the reason for it properly explained, to refuse to obey and to resist the officer directed to carry out the search. To permit this would tend to undermine prison discipline to a material degree, and I do not think that it was intended . . In any event, I consider that it was perfectly obvious to all the prisoners searched that the prison officers were searching for some unauthorised object or objects. That knowledge found sufficient notification of the reason for the search, if such notification was, contrary to my view, required. It was not incumbent upon the governor to have the prisoners informed of the exact nature of the object being sought, still less to divulge where the information came from that led him to decide to have the search carried out.’

Judges:

Carswell J

Citations:

(1992) 8 NIJB 86

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Carroll and Al-Hasan and Secretary of State for Home Department Admn 16-Feb-2001
The claimants challenged the instruction that they must squat whilst undergoing a strip search in prison. A dog search had given cause to supect the presence of explosives in the wing, and the officers understood that such explosives might be hidden . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Prisons

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.211429

Livingstone v Ministry of Defence: CANI 1984

The plaintiff was injured when a soldier fired a baton round after some soldiers were attacked by rioters. The round had been deliberately fired, but not to strike the plaintiff. The claim was in negligence and assault and battery. The trial judge dismissed the claim in negligence but did not give a ruling on the question of battery.
Held: The court allowed the appeal and ordered a new trial, rejecting the argument that there could be no battery because the plaintiff was not the chosen target: ‘In my judgment when a soldier deliberately fires at one rioter intending to strike him and he misses him and hits another rioter nearby, the soldier has ‘intentionally’ applied force to the rioter who has been struck. Similarly if a soldier fires a rifle bullet at a rioter intending to strike him and the bullet strikes that rioter and passes through his body and wounds another rioter directly behind the first rioter, whom the soldier had not seen, both rioters have been ‘intentionally’ struck by the soldier and, assuming that the force used was not justified, the soldier has committed a battery against both.’

Judges:

Hutton J

Citations:

[1984] NILR 356

Cited by:

CitedBici and Bici v Ministry of Defence QBD 7-Apr-2004
Claimants sought damages for personal injuries incurred when, in Pristina, Kosovo and during a riot, British soldiers on a UN peacekeeping expedition fired on a car.
Held: The incidents occurred in the course of peace-keeping duties. It was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Northern Ireland, Armed Forces

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.198140

Mcfarland, Re Application for Judicial Review: QBNI 2002

The claimant sought compensation for his imprisonment after his conviction had been overturned.

Judges:

Kerr J

Citations:

[2002] NIQB 14, [2002] NIJB 154

Citing:

Appealed toMcFarland, Re Application for Judicial Review CANI 28-Jun-2002
. .

Cited by:

Appeal fromMcFarland, Re Application for Judicial Review CANI 28-Jun-2002
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.196532

Turkington and Others (Practising as McCartan Turkington Breen) v Times Newspapers Ltd: CANI 11 Nov 1998

A meeting was not a public meeting just because the public attended without objection. A press conference to which press only had had invitations was not as such public, and a report of it was not protected under the Act

Judges:

Carswell LCJ

Citations:

Times 11-Nov-1998, [1998] NI 358

Statutes:

Defamation Act (Northern Ireland) 1955 7 Sch para 9

Citing:

Appeal fromMcCartan Turkington Breen v Telegraph Group NIHC 11-May-1998
. .

Cited by:

Appeal fromMcCartan Turkington Breen (A Firm) v Times Newspapers Limited HL 2-Nov-2000
(Northern Ireland) The defendant reported a press conference at which the claims denying the criminal responsibility of an army private were made. The report was severely critical of the claimants, who then sued in defamation. The defendants claimed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Northern Ireland

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.90023

Regina v Greater Belfast Coroner, ex parte Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission: CANI 11 May 2001

The Commission was a creation of statute, and had not been given power to intervene in judicial proceedings. The coroner was investigating deaths at Omagh from a terrorist bombing, and the Commission sought to intervene. The Act should not be read restrictively, but nor could provisions be read into it which did not exist at will. The Commission had its own powers to commence investigations. When it might become involved in proceedings, either it sought to influence the outcome or it did not. If it did not, it was an improper distraction, and if it did it would be an improper intrusion, threatening the appearance of independence of the judiciary. In either case costs would be increased and have to be paid, and new issues of equality of arms would arise.

Citations:

Times 11-May-2001

Statutes:

Northern Ireland Act 1998

Human Rights, Coroners, Constitutional, Northern Ireland

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.88484

Regina v Newtonabbey Magistrates Court Ex Parte Belfast Telegraph Newspapers Ltd: CANI 27 Aug 1997

When the defendant charged with indecent assault was remanded on bail to await trial, the magistrate ordered that there should be no report of the proceedings at that stage because of the defendant’s concerns that publicity would lead to his being attacked; this would frustrate the administration of justice because he might no longer be able to face trial. The newspaper objected.
Held: Magistrates cannot prevent publication of proceedings outside the strict limits of the Act even if could interfere with course of justice. ‘The use of the words ‘some other public interest’ indicates that Lord Diplock had in mind the protection of the public interest in the administration of justice rather than the private welfare of those caught up in that administration.’

Citations:

Times 27-Aug-1997, 1997 NILR 309, [1997] NI QBD 309

Statutes:

Contempt of Court Act 1981 4(2)

Cited by:

Appeal fromBelfast Telegraph Newspapers Ltd, In the Matter of CANI 3-Apr-2001
. .
CitedHarper and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Aldershot Magistrates Court Admn 8-Jun-2010
Police defendants not to have addresses withheld
The defendants, senior police officers were accused of misconduct in public office, being said to have sought improperly to interfere in prosecutions for speeding. They appealed against refusal by the magistrates to have their addresses protected. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Northern Ireland

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.87436

In Re A Company (No 007946 of 1993): ChD 18 Nov 1993

A Northern Ireland company can be wound up in England and Wales if its principal place of business had been in England and Wales. The company incorporated in Northern Ireland became insolvent. It sought to strike out the Secretary of State’s petition under 124A, and said it could not apply to a Northern Ireland Company.
Held: The definition of an incorporated company included a company incorporated anywhre in the UK.

Judges:

Morritt J

Citations:

Times 18-Nov-1993, Gazette 02-Mar-1994, [1994] 2 WLR 439

Statutes:

Insolvency Act 1986 124A 220

Insolvency, Company, Northern Ireland

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.81640

Zalewska v Department for Social Development: HL 12 Nov 2008

(Northern Ireland) The claimant challenged the rules restricting payment of benefits to nationals from the 8 latest European Accession states to those with an unbroken 12 month working record. The applicant came from Poland and worked at two authorised employments but failed to find a third. She had left her partner because of his violence.
Held: (Lady Hale and Lord Neuberger dissenting) The provision was not incompatible with European Law. The derogation was required to be proportionate. The scheme was intended to allow, through the registration of employments, the government to monitor the impact of the accessions on the the general labour market.

Judges:

Lord Hope of Craighead, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Carswell, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury

Citations:

[2008] UKHL 67, [2008] 1 WLR 2602, [2009] Eu LR 344, [2009] 1 CMLR 24, [2009] 2 All ER 319

Links:

Bailii, Times, HL

Statutes:

EC Treaty 18EC, Accession (Immigration and Worker Registration) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/1219), Immigration Act 1971, Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community, Income Support (General) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1987 (SR 1987/459)

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Citing:

CitedRoyer v Belgium ECJ 8-Apr-1976
ECJ The right of nationals of a member state to enter the territory of another member state and reside there is a right conferred directly, on any person falling within the scope of community law, by the Treaty, . .
CitedTrojani v Centre public d’aide sociale de Bruxelles (CPAS) ECJ 7-Sep-2004
EAT Freedom of movement of persons – Citizenship of the European Union – Right of residence – Directive 90/364/EEC – Limitations and conditions – Person working in a hostel in return for benefits in kind – . .
CitedLopes Da Veiga v Staatssecretaris Van Justitie ECJ 27-Sep-1989
Europa Article 216(1) of the Act of Accession of Portugal must be interpreted as meaning that the provisions relating to the holding of employment and equal treatment which are contained in Article 7 et seq . of . .
CitedCanal Satelite Digital SL v Adminstracion General del Estado, and Distribuidora de Television Digital SA (DTS) ECJ 22-Jan-2002
The complainant company manufactured lawful TV decoders. It complained that Spain applied a requirement for prior approval before they could be used in Spain. They complained that the system operated to restrict the free movement of goods within the . .
CitedMouvement contre le racisme, l’antisemitisme et la xenophobie ASBL (MRAX) v Etat Belge ECJ 25-Jul-2002
Europa Third country nationals who are the spouse of a Member State national – Requirement for a visa – Right of entry for spouses not in possession of identity documents or a visa – Right of residence for . .
CitedSkanavi and Chryssanthakopoulos (Judgment) ECJ 29-Feb-1996
Any formalities required in order to have a driving licence issued in one Member State recognised in another Member State constitute an obstacle to the free movement of persons, and are in breach of the Treaty.
Fromancais Sa v Fonds D’Orientation Et De Regularisation Des Marches Agricoles (Forma) ECJ 23-Feb-1983
‘In order to establish whether a provision of community law is consonant with the principle of proportionality it is necessary to establish, in the first place, whether the means it employs to achieve its aim correspond to the importance of the aim . .
CitedCommission v Belgium (Free Movement Of Persons) ECJ 23-Mar-2006
Europa Failure to fulfil obligations – Breach of Community legislation on the right of residence of citizens of the Union – National legislation and administrative practice relating to the requirement of . .
CitedD, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 11-Oct-2004
Challenge was to Regulations which affect the position of nationals of certain States which had acceded to membership of the European Union . .
At CANIZalewska v Department for Social Development CANI 9-May-2007
. .

Cited by:

CitedPatmalniece v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 16-Mar-2011
The claimant challenged as incompatible with EU law, the Regulations which restricted the entitlement to state pension credit to those entitled to reside in the UK.
Held: The appeal failed (Majority). The conditions imposed by the Regulations . .
CitedSecretary of State for Work and Pensions v Gubeladze SC 19-Jun-2019
The claimant had come from Latvia to the UK in 2008, but not registered under the Worker Registration Scheme until 2010. She now sought state pension credit. The SS appealed from a judgment that it was to calculate her entitlement to include her . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Benefits

Updated: 06 April 2022; Ref: scu.277816

Jones v Jones and others: ChNI 2 Feb 2001

This case raises a number of important issues on the nature of a right of residence and the extent of the rights thereby created or reserved. Although the granting and reserving of rights of residence is a common feature of Irish agricultural land transactions and is a tribute to the Irish sense of family obligation the precise nature of such rights has long been a matter of judicial and academic debate.

Citations:

[2001] NICh 2

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Land

Updated: 06 April 2022; Ref: scu.202027