Category: Northern Ireland

Donaghy, Re Application for Judicial Review 25(1): CANI 8 May 2002

Citations:

[2002] NICA 25(1)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Cited by:

See Also – Donaghy, Re Application for Judicial Review 25(2) CANI 8-May-2002
. .
Cited – In re Officer L HL 31-Jul-2007
Police officers appealed against refusal of orders protecting their anonymity when called to appear before the Robert Hamill Inquiry.
Held: ‘The tribunal accordingly approached the matter properly under article 2 in seeking to ascertain . .
See Also – Donaghy, Re Application for Judicial Review 25(3) CANI 8-May-2002
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.189667

Donaghy, Re Application for Judicial Review 25(3): CANI 8 May 2002

Citations:

[2002] NICA 25(3)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Citing:

See Also – Donaghy, Re Application for Judicial Review 25(1) CANI 8-May-2002
. .
See Also – Donaghy, Re Application for Judicial Review 25(2) CANI 8-May-2002
. .

Cited by:

Cited – In re Officer L HL 31-Jul-2007
Police officers appealed against refusal of orders protecting their anonymity when called to appear before the Robert Hamill Inquiry.
Held: ‘The tribunal accordingly approached the matter properly under article 2 in seeking to ascertain . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.189669

Peart, Re Application for Judicial Review: QBNI 20 May 2003

Citations:

[2003] NIQB 34

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Citing:

Appeal – Peart, Re an Application for Judicial Review CANI 30-Jun-2003
. .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Peart, Re an Application for Judicial Review CANI 30-Jun-2003
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184120

Murdock, Re an Application for Judicial Review NIQB 23: QBNI 31 Mar 2003

Application by a sentenced prisoner, for a declaration that the search of his cell by prison officers and in particular the examination of legal correspondence when he was not present was unlawful.

Citations:

[2003] NIQB 23

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

See Also – Murdock, Re an Application for Judicial Review NIQB 24 QBNI 31-Mar-2003
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Prisons

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184108

Russell v Devine (On Appeal from the Court of Appeal Northern Ireland): HL 8 May 2003

The House was asked whether a specimen of blood required under the regulations, having been requested at a hospital or health centre had to be taken there.
Held: The health centre was not a hospital within the regulations. However the request had already been made at a police station, which request had not been superseded.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hutton, Lord Millett

Citations:

[2003] UKHL 24, [2003] NI 224, [2003] 1 WLR 1187, [2003] 2 Cr App R 26

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Road Traffic (Northern Ireland) Order 1995 (SI 1995/2994)

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Citing:

Cited – Butler v Easton QBD 1970
The initial formalities of a request for a specimen of blood from a driver took place at one police station, but no doctor was available there and the suspect was taken to another police station where a specimen was given. He challenged his . .
Cited – Milne v M’Donald HCJ 1971
The court was asked whether a blood specimen having been requested at one police station, it could be taken at another.
Held: The requirement to provide a specimen for a laboratory test is something different from the actual providing of the . .
Cited – Pascoe v Nicholson HL 1981
A specimen of blood was required at one police station but provided at another.
Held: The request was validly made. . .
Cited – Fox v Chief Constable of Gwent HL 1986
The driver left an accident. The police entered his home unlawfully, and on his refusal to supply a breath test, he was arrested and charged with faiing to supply.
Held: A lawful arrest is not an essential requirement before a breath test, and . .
Confirmed – Howard v Hallett QBD 1984
The police adduced in evidence against the defendant the analysis of a specimen of breath which was not the specimen required under the Act.
Held: The evidence of the analysis of the specimen relied on by the police was inadmissible in . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 3 of 1999) (Lynn) HL 15-Dec-2000
A DNA sample had been wrongfully retained after the suspect had been acquitted, and the sample had been used in a later investigation to identify him. A subsequent sample had been taken, and the result of that second test had been used as evidence . .
Cited – Murray v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 4-Feb-1993
The defendant claimed that a breathalyser procedure mistake vitiated the subsequent prosecution.
Held: It was essential that the motorist who was asked to provide a sample of breath be first warned that a failure to provide a specimen would . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.181924

Wright, Re Application for Judical Review: QBNI 7 Mar 2003

The applicant is the father of a man called Billy Wright who was murdered on 27 December 1997 while an inmate of Her Majesty’s Prison, the Maze, Lisburn, County Antrim. By this application Mr Wright seeks judicial review of the decision of the Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland refusing to disclose the file of the police investigation into the murder of his son.

Judges:

Kerr J

Citations:

[2003] NIQB 17

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Kansal (2) HL 29-Nov-2001
The prosecutor had lead and relied at trial on evidence obtained by compulsory questioning under the 1986 Act.
Held: In doing so the prosecutor was acting to give effect to section 433.
The decision in Lambert to disallow retrospective . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180293

In re Shields: HL 6 Feb 2003

(Northern Ireland) The chief constable appealed against a decision that the directions he had given, that officers with poor attendance records for sickness should not be considered for promotion.
Held: The Chief Constable had, following the Act, found a serious management problem. The directions were designed to encourage good attendance, and were within his powers, and valid. The scheme of the Act was that the Secretary of State would make Regulations which would be supplemented by such directions.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Hutton

Citations:

Times 07-Feb-2003, [2003] UKHL 3

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Police (Northern Ireland) Act 1998 22 25

Citing:

Cited – Padfield v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food HL 14-Feb-1968
Exercise of Ministerial Discretion
The Minister had power to direct an investigation in respect of any complaint as to the operation of any marketing scheme for agricultural produce. Milk producers complained about the price paid by the milk marketing board for their milk when . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Police

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.178986

Regina v Gaynor: CANI 14 Sep 2001

The defendant sought leave to appeal against a sentence of three and a half years for offences of escaping lawful custody, dangerous driving and driving whilst disqualified. The sentence included consecutive and concurrent sentences. After being sentence for one offence, he feigned disability, and escaped. He was later caught after serious dangerous drunk driving. Concurrent sentences should normally be used in road traffic sentencing where the offences are on one occasion. The sentence of 21 months on a guilty plea for dangerous driving was excessive, and 18 moths was substituted. The overall total was reduced to three years by also reducing the sentence for escaping custody to nine months.

Citations:

[2001] NIECA 30

Links:

Bailii

Northern Ireland, Criminal Sentencing, Road Traffic

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.166315

McMullen v Gibney and Gibney: NIHC 13 Jan 1999

Citations:

[1999] NIEHC 1

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Parry v Cleaver HL 5-Feb-1969
PI Damages not Reduced for Own Pension
The plaintiff policeman was disabled by the negligence of the defendant and received a disablement pension. Part had been contributed by himself and part by his employer.
Held: The plaintiff’s appeal succeeded. Damages for personal injury were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Damages

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.166323

Jones, Regina v: CCNI 10 Sep 2010

‘This ruling determines an application by the Defendant that I should recuse myself as trial judge. The application is based on my knowledge of the following information relating to the history of this prosecution:
(a) The earlier judgment of the Court of Appeal[1]
(b) A subsequent retrial of the Defendant, which was aborted and had no outcome in consequence.’

Judges:

Mccloskey J

Citations:

[2010] NICC 39

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Crime

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.430626

McGrath v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and Another: HL 12 Jul 2001

Police were not liable for false imprisonment after arresting a person named in a warrant which had been issued by another police force as a result of one person who was arrested falsely giving the other person’s name. The warrant might have been capable of being struck out as being founded on a mistake of mistake, but it remained valid until it was recalled or cancelled. To comply with the section, and to be absolved from liability the words only required to assert that the person in fact arrested had in fact been charged. It was not necessary to establish that the person named had been charged. The warrant would have been valid in the home jurisdiction, and should be valid within other jurisdictions within the British Isles.
Lord Clyde said that as to an arrest warrant: ‘The warrants must be sufficiently clear and precise in their terms so that all those interested in their execution may know precisely what are the limits of the power which has been granted.’

Judges:

Lord Steyn, Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Cooke of Thorndon, Lord Clyde, Lord Hutton

Citations:

Times 13-Jul-2001, [2001] UKHL 39, [2001] 2 AC 731, [2001] 4 All ER 334, [2001] NI 303, [2001] 3 WLR 312

Links:

Bailii, House of Lords

Statutes:

Criminal Law Act 1977 38(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Faisaltex Ltd and others, Regina (on the Application of) v Crown Court Sitting at Preston and others etc Admn 21-Nov-2008
Nine claimants sought leave to bring judicial review of the issue of search warrants against solicitors’ and business and other premises, complaining of the seizure of excluded material and of special procedure material. There were suspicions of the . .
Cited – Global Cash and Carry Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Birmingham Magistrates’ Court and Others Admn 19-Feb-2013
The claimant sought an order quashing a search warrant, and for damages. The officer had said that he had evidence that the claimants were storing an distributing from the premises large quantities of counterfeit goods and drugs.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other, Northern Ireland

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.162912

Regina v McCullough: CANI 16 Nov 1998

The defendant failed to appear at his trial. The judge urged the jury to ‘use their common sense’ in interpreting whether his non appearance indicated guilt. Even if there had been any unfairness in this, the judge’s own summing up later remedied that failure. He had been sentenced to thirteen years for manslaughter committed in a serious, drunken, assault. Even though comparisons in such cases were of limited value, it was out of line with general trends, and a sentence of ten years was substituted.

Judges:

Carswell LCJ

Citations:

[1998] NIECA 1, [1998] NICA 1, [1999] NI 39

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, Criminal Sentencing, Northern Ireland

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.162939

Regina v Chief Constable of The Royal Ulster Constabulary Ex Parte Begley; Regina v McWilliams: HL 24 Jul 1997

There is no right at common law to have a solicitor present during a police interview. There was no infringement of the suspect’s human rights by the Northern Ireland Rules. The House discussed its ability to take the law forward: ‘It is true that the House has a power to develop the law. But it is a limited power. And it can be exercised only in the gaps left by Parliament. It is impermissible for the House to develop the law in a direction which is contrary to the expressed will of Parliament.’

Judges:

Lord Browne-Wilkinson

Citations:

Gazette 05-Nov-1997, Times 20-Oct-1997, [1997] NI 278, [1997] UKHL 39, [1997] 4 All ER 833, [1997] 1 WLR 1475

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Evidence (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 (1989 no 134)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Cullen v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (Northern Ireland) HL 10-Jul-2003
The claimant had been arrested. He had been refused access to a solicitor whilst detaiined, but, in breach of statutory duty, he had not been given reasons as to why access was denied. He sought damages for that failure.
Held: If damages were . .
Cited – In re McKerr (Northern Ireland) HL 11-Mar-2004
The deceased had been shot by soldiers of the British Army whilst in a car in Northern Ireland. The car was alleged to have ‘run’ a checkpoint. The claimants said the investigation, now 20 years ago, had been inadequate. The claim was brought under . .
Cited – Alexander Von Starck v The Queen PC 28-Feb-2000
(Jamaica) The defendant had fatally stabbed a woman. On arrest, he admitted killing her and that he had the knife which he had used to do so. He gave the police officer a pouch containing a knife, on which blood of the same group as that of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Police, Northern Ireland, Human Rights

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.135212

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 Also – McKeown 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:

Cited – A 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 . .
Cited – Secretary 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:

Mentioned – Rex 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. . .
Cited – The 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 – . .
Cited – Regina 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 . .
Cited – Palmer 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:

Cited – Alexander, 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:

Cited – Dolphin 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:

Cited – Attorney 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 . .
Cited – Rooney 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:

Cited – BBC 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:

Cited – British 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:

Cited – JR17 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:

Cited – Christian 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:

Cited – Nash 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 . .
Cited – McKerr 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 from – Regina 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 . .
Cited – National 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 . .
Cited – Assistant 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:

Cited – Hughes 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:

Cited – Rooney 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:

Cited – Al-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:

Cited – Rimmer 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 . .
Cited – Gissing 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 . .
Cited – Pettitt 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:

Approved – Oxley 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 . .
Cited – Stack 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:

Cited – Santander (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:

Cited – O’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:

Cited – Shamoon 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:

Cited – Regina 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:

Cited – Regina 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 . .
Cited – Regina 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:

Cited – Tweed 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:

Cited – Rooney 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:

Cited – Hughes 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:

Cited – Tovey 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:

Cited – Dellal 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. . .
Cited – K 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:

Cited – Regina 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:

Cited – Morgan, 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:

Cited – Charles 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:

Cited – Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate SC 12-Dec-2012
The claimant company said that the 2010 Act was outside the competence of the Scottish Parliament insofar as it severely restricted the capacity of those selling cigarettes to display them for sale. They suggested two faults. First, that the subject . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Constitutional, Northern Ireland, Agriculture

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.468810

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:

Cited – Regina 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 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:

Cited – Attorney-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 . .
Cited – Regina 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 . .
Cited – Attorney-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:

Cited – Regina 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