Oliver v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 23 Jun 1999

In a malicious prosecution case, there is no automatic right to have it tried before a jury. If that is to be applied for, the application must be made at the earliest possible directions hearing. Where, as in this case other factors suggested that a jury trial is not appropriate, then one need not be ordered.

Citations:

Times 07-Jul-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1656

Statutes:

County Courts Act 1984 66

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Torts – Other

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146571

Parker v Chief Constable of the Hampshire Constabulary: CA 25 Jun 1999

The claimant sought damages after his arrest by armed police. The defendant appealed a substantial award of damages.
Held: The section required the officer to have reasonable grounds for suspecting the arrestees to be guilty of the offence. The constable must suspect both that an arrestable offence has been committed and that the citizen he is arresting is guilty, and in addition he is required to have reasonable grounds for these suspicions.
Held: The state of mind of the officer at the time of the arrest reflected a degree of uncertainty, or to use Lord Devlin’s words, a state of ‘conjecture or surmise’. This state of mind, suspicious but uncertain, was based on reasonable grounds, and the arrest was lawful.

Judges:

Lord Justice Peter Gibson, Lord Justice Schiemann, Lord Justice Judge

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1685

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police & Criminal Evidence Act 1984 24(6)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedJarrett v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police CA 14-Feb-2003
The claimant sought damages for false imprisonment and assault after her wrongful arrest. She had waived her handbag at an officer investigating a disturbance and been arrested. The police said the arrest was lawful, she being suspected of common . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146600

MP v Dainty: CA 21 Jun 1999

The defendant sought leave to appeal out of time against an award of damages for sexual assault. He had been unable to recover his file of papers from his former solicitors.
Held: The delay had nevertheless been excessive, and the prejudice to the claimant of a new trial would be overwhelming. Though there was no express reference to In re H, the judge will have been bound to have applied its standards. Leave refused.

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1632

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedIn re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) HL 14-Dec-1995
Evidence allowed – Care Application after Abuse
Children had made allegations of serious sexual abuse against their step-father. He was acquitted at trial, but the local authority went ahead with care proceedings. The parents appealed against a finding that a likely risk to the children had still . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.146547

ARB v IVF Hammersmith Ltd: QBD 6 Oct 2017

The claimant, father of a child born by artificial insemination from a frozen embryo, alleged that the signature on the form of consent had been forged.

Judges:

Jay J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 2438 (QB), [2017] WLR(D) 640

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other, Health Professions

Updated: 21 January 2023; Ref: scu.598438

Markel International Insurance Co Ltd v Higgins: CA 23 Jul 2009

‘This appeal arises out of a finding at trial of dishonesty against an underwriting agent in his early seventies who was then suffering from Alzheimer’s disease and had probably been suffering from it to some degree, possibly at a pre-clinical stage, at the time, two or three years earlier, when the events which led to that finding were taking place. The essential issue raised on this appeal is whether the judge, Teare J, was wrong in his conclusion that Alzheimer’s was not an explanation, either of the agent’s actions for which he had to render an account or of difficulties in his evidence at trial, such as should have led the judge to reject what were otherwise powerful allegations of dishonesty.’

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 790

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.361454

Saxon v George Castle, The Elder, George Castle, The Younger, And Browne, Gent, One, and Co: 1 May 1837

Plaintiff gave defendants a warrant of attorney to enter up judgment if certain costs should be unpaid within four days after the Master should have taxed the same. Defendants procured a taxation ex parte ; and, by an incorrect representation to the Master, obtained from him an allocatur for more costs than they were entitled to. By order of a Judge, on summons, a new taxation was directed, pending which the defendants arrested the plaintiff. Afterwards the new taxation was had, and the costs were reduced. Plaintiff declared in case for a wrongful arrest, and defendants pleaded that the costs had been taxed and a sum found due, for which they arrested. Held, 1. That plaintiff might properly sue in case for a malicious arrest, and was not bound to declare for a deceitful representation to the Master. 2. That the plea was not supported, there having been, in effect, no taxation when the defendants arrested : and that the plaintiff was not bound to reply the facts which rendered the first taxation invalid. But 3. That judgment must be arrested, because the declaration (which set out the facts of the case} alleged only that the defendants had ‘ wrongfully and injuriously’ delivered the writ to the sheriff, not adding maliciously.’

Citations:

[1837] EngR 682, (1837) 6 Ad and E 652, (1837) 112 ER 251

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.313799

Thomas Marshall (Exports) Ltd v Guinle: ChD 1979

The managing director defendant had resigned before the end of the contractual term. There was an express covenant in his contract against using or disclosing the company’s confidential information during or after his employment. It was submitted that this was a repudiation which brought the contract to an end and with it any obligation to observe the restrictive covenants.
Held: Sir Robert Megarry VC considered the power of a court to prevent a wrongdoer from benefiting from his wrong: ‘Above all, I think the courts must be astute to prevent a wrongdoer from profiting too greatly from his wrong. If without just cause a servant who has contracted to serve for a term of years refuses to do so, it is easy to see that the court is powerless to make him do what he has contracted to do: neither by decreeing specific performance nor by granting an injunction can the court make the servant perform loyally what he is refusing to do, however wrongfully . . But why should the court’s inability to make a servant work for his employer mean that as soon as the servant refuses to do so the court is forthwith disabled from restraining him from committing any breach, however flagrant, of his other obligations during the period of his contract? I would wholly reject the doctrine of automatic determination, whether in its wide form or in its narrowed version.’
As to whether information was confidential, Sir Robert Megarry VC said: ‘If one turns from the authorities and looks at the matter as a question of principle, I think (and I say this very tentatively, because the principle has not been argued out) that four elements may be discerned which may be of some assistance in identifying confidential information or trade secrets which the court will protect. I speak of such information or secrets only in an industrial or trade setting. First, I think that the information must be information the release of which the owner believes would be injurious to him or of advantage to his rivals or others. Second, I think the owner must believe that the information is confidential or secret, i.e., that it is not already in the public domain. It may be that some or all of his rivals already have the information: but as long as the owner believes it to be confidential I think he is entitled to try and protect it. Third, I think that the owner’s belief under the two previous heads must be reasonable. Fourth, I think that the information must be judged in the light of the usage and practices of the particular industry or trade concerned. It may be that information which does not satisfy all these requirements may be entitled to protection as confidential information or trade secrets: but I think that any information which does satisfy them must be of a type which is entitled to protection.’

Judges:

Sir Robert Megarry VC

Citations:

[1979] Ch 227, [1978] 3 All ER 193, [1978] ICR 950, [1978] 3 WLR 116

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedSG and R Valuation Service Co v Boudrais and others QBD 12-May-2008
The claimant sought to require the defendants not to work during their notice period to achieve the equivalent of garden leave despite there being no provision for garden leave in the contracts. It was said that the defendants had conspired together . .
CitedSociete Generale, London Branch v Geys SC 19-Dec-2012
The claimant’s employment by the bank had been terminated. The parties disputed the sums due, and the date of the termination of the contract. The court was asked ‘Does a repudiation of a contract of employment by the employer which takes the form . .
CitedGunton v Richmond-upon-Thames London Borough Council CA 1980
The plaintiff college registrar had been the subject of disciplinary proceedings, but the defendant had not followed the contractual procedure. The judge had ordered an inquiry as to damages on the basis that the Plaintiff was entitled to remain in . .
CitedLancashire Fires Ltd v S A Lyons and Co Ltd CA 1996
It was claimed that a loan to the employee from a customer of the employer coupled with an exclusive supply agreement by the employee as and when the competing business becomes operative was in breach of an non-compete clause.
Held: The . .
CitedFaccenda Chicken Ltd v Fowler CA 1986
Nature of Confidentiality in Information
The appellant plaintiff company had employed the defendant as sales manager. The contract of employment made no provision restricting use of confidential information. He left to set up in competition. The company now sought to prevent him using . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Contract, Intellectual Property

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.270349

Burris v Azadani: CA 27 Jul 1995

The court addressed the principles upon which a Court will grant interlocutory injunctive relief in harassment cases.
Held: Both the High Court and the County Court had jurisdiction under the 1981 and 1984 Acts to grant interlocutory injunctions in wide terms to restrain conduct that was not in itself tortuous or otherwise unlawful, if such order was reasonably to be regarded as necessary for the protection of a plaintiff’s legitimate interest. The court has power to impose an exclusion zone when granting a non-molestation injunction restraining harassment of the victim by the defendant, provided no unnecessary restraint was placed on the defendant. It would not seem to me to be a valid objection to the making of an exclusion zone order that the conduct to be restrained is not in itself tortuous or otherwise unlawful, if such an order is reasonably regarded as necessary for the protection of a plaintiff’s legitimate interest’ and ‘Neither the statute nor authority in my view precludes the making of an ‘exclusion zone’ order. But that does not mean that such orders should be made at all readily, or without very good reason. There are two interests to be reconciled. One is that of the defendant. His liberty must be respected up to the point at which his conduct infringes, or threatens to infringe, the rights of the plaintiff. No restraint should be placed on him which is not judged to be necessary to protect the rights of the plaintiff. But the plaintiff has an interest which the court must be astute to protect. The rule of law requires that those whose rights are infringed should seek the aid of the court, and respect for the legal process can only suffer if those who need protection fail to get it. That, in part at least, is why disobedience to orders of the court has always earned severe punishment. Respect for the freedom of the aggressor should never lead the court to deny necessary protection to the victim.’
An injunction was granted excluding the defendant from an area. It was recognised that an exclusion zone may have the effect of restraining conduct not in itself tortious – e.g. travelling along a public highway – but such a restraint maybe imposed if it reasonably regarded as necessary for the protection of a plaintiff’s legitimate interests.

Judges:

Sir Thomas Bingham MR

Citations:

Times 09-Aug-1995, [1995] 4 All ER 802, [1995] 1 WLR 1373, [1995] EWCA Civ 50

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Supreme Court Act 1981 37(1), County Courts Act 1984 38

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHuntingdon Life Sciences Limited v Curtin; Watson; British Union for Abolition of Vivisection; Animal Liberation Front; Animal Rights Coalition and London Animal Action CA 15-Oct-1997
The various defendants were accused of protesting repeatedly at the activities of the claimants, who sought orders under the Act to stop their protests as harassment.
Held: The Act was misused by trying to use it outside the areas intended; . .
CitedHuntingdon Life Sciences Group Plc Huntingdon Life Sciences Limited, Brian Cass (for and on Behalf of the Employees of the First Claimant Pursuant To Cpr Part 19.6) v Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty QBD 28-May-2004
The claimant companies conducted forms of medical research to which the respondents objected, and showed their objections by a wide variety of acts and threats which the claimants sought to have stopped. The defendants sought discharge of an interim . .
CitedUniversity of Oxford and others v Broughton and others QBD 10-Nov-2004
The claimants sought injunctions to protect themselves against the activities of animal rights protesters, including an order preventing them coming with a wide area around the village.
Held: The orders made were justified with the additional . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Torts – Other, Contempt of Court

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.182287

TVZ and Others v Manchester City Football Club Ltd: QBD 6 May 2021

Applications in proceedings between the eight Claimants and the Defendant arising out of sexual abuse perpetrated by B when he was a football coach in the 1980s. Each of the Claimants was sexually and emotionally abused by B, in some cases repeatedly. At the relevant times, the Claimants were boys aged between 8 and 16 years old who were abused by B whilst he coached youth football teams in which they played.

Judges:

Mr Justice Cavanagh

Citations:

[2021] EWHC 1179 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Vicarious Liability, Torts – Other

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.662430

Ikea Ltd and Others v Brown and Others: ComC 7 May 2009

Action short of standard for malicious prosecution

The claimants alleged a fraud by the eight defendants. The sixth defendant counterclaimed for damages alleging malicious prosecution. The claimant sought the strike out of the counterclaim.
Held: The allegations failed insofar as they related to the institution of civil proceedings. As to the criminal proceedings: ‘it is necessary show that the defendant falsely and maliciously gave evidence desiring and intending that a prosecution be brought, that the facts relating to the crime are exclusively within the defendant’s knowledge so that the prosecution authorities cannot exercise their independent judgment in the matter and that a prosecution is virtually inevitable.’ The defendant had not reached that standard, and the counterclaim was struck out.

Judges:

Teare J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 955 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedMoon v Kent County Council and Another 1995
. .
CitedGregory v Portsmouth City Council HL 10-Feb-2000
Disciplinary proceedings had been taken by the local authority against Mr Gregory, a council member, after allegations had been made that he had failed to declare conflicts of interest, and that he had used confidential information to secure a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.341863

Palomares v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police: CA 11 Oct 1996

The Chief Constable appealed a finding of false imprisonment. The claimant had been arrested, but later the charges were dismissed. The jury found on the trial for malicious prosecution that the officers had not believed the truth of the allegations they had made. The plaintiff had insulted the officer and later apologised. The defendant appealed saying the jury’s verdict was inconsistent, and the judge’s direction inadequate.
Held: The jury’s verdict was not inconsistent. Though the plaintiff had misbehaved, the officers had ‘gilded the lily’ and thrown the book at him, and the judge’s approach on that point had been correct. However the judge had failed to draw distinctions which were necessary regarding the connection between the lawfulness of the arrest and later the reasonable and probable cause for the charges laid, and the honest or other belief of the officers, and later again as to damages. The jury’s verdict must be set aside.

Judges:

Lord Justice Beldam, Lord Justice Ward, Lord Justice Schiemann

Citations:

[1996] EWCA Civ 709

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedGlinski v McIver HL 1962
The court considered the tort of malicious prosecution when committed by a police officer, saying ‘But these cases must be carefully watched so as to see that there really is some evidence from his conduct that he knew it was a groundless charge.’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.140576

Various Claimants v News Group Newspapers Ltd (1436): ChD 4 Jun 2020

Judges:

Mann J

Citations:

[2020] EWHC 1436 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See AlsoVarious Claimants v News Group Newspapers Ltd ChD 19-Jun-2020
Defendant’s strike out application – limitation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Torts – Other

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.651920

The Lord Chancellor v Blavo and Co Solictors Ltd and Another: QBD 21 Dec 2018

Attempt to recover legal aid fees said to have been paid on fraudulent claims.

Judges:

Pepperall J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 3556 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Legal Aid, Torts – Other, Legal Professions

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.632217

Lawson v Glaves-Smith, Executor of the Estate of Dawes (Deceased): QBD 14 Nov 2006

The claimant sought damages saying that she had been falsely imprisoned, raped and drugged by the defendant who had since died.
Held: The court had only the evidence of the claimant, and must be careful in examining it. On that evidence the case was found to be established. Such allegations fell to be treated as in a special class, and substantial damages were awarded.

Judges:

Eady J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2865 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedGriffiths v Williams CA 21-Nov-1995
The Defendant landlord had demanded rent arrears and said that if the Claimant did not do what he wanted he would evict her from her flat. He forcibly raped her and then fought a criminal trial, alleging that sexual relations had been consensual and . .
CitedHeil v Rankin CA 13-Jun-2000
Where supervening events might contribute to the personal injury suffered, the proper approach in apportioning compensation in respect of one occasion was in general terms to provide just and sufficient compensation for the injury caused without . .
CitedRichardson v Howie CA 13-Aug-2004
The claimant sought damages for assault. In the course of a tempestuous relationship, she said the respondent had physically assaulted her in Barbados. He was later convicted of soliciting her murder. She sought and was awarded aggravated damages, . .
CitedAllied Maples Group Ltd v Simmons and Simmons CA 12-May-1995
Lost chance claim – not mere speculative claim
Solicitors failed to advise the plaintiffs sufficiently in a property transaction. A warranty against liability for a former tenant’s obligations under leases had not been obtained. The trial judge held that, on a balance of probabilities, there was . .
CitedDoyle (By Her Mother and Next Friend) v Wallace CA 18-Jun-1998
A court awarding personal injury damages could make allowance for a prospective increase in salary which a claimant might have achieved upon completion of qualifications. In this case an increase was allowed at half up from an administrative pay . .

Cited by:

CitedAT and others v Dulghieru and Another QBD 19-Feb-2009
The claimants had been subject to unlawful human trafficking. Their abductors had been imprisoned, and they now sought damages. The court was asked now to assess the damages to be awarded for sexual enslavement. Each claimant suffered chronic post . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Torts – Other

Updated: 12 December 2022; Ref: scu.246010

Kitechnology BV v Unicor GmbH: CA 1995

The plaintiffs owned confidential information relating to novel plastic coated pipes; the defendants were German companies and individuals domiciled in Germany, who it was alleged had used the plaintiffs’ confidential information. One issue the court had to consider was whether, in relation to (non-contractual) claims for breach of confidence, the claims arose in tort, thus giving the court jurisdiction under Article 5(3) of the Brussels Convention (which provided that a person domiciled in a Contracting State may be sued in another Contracting State in matters relating to tort, delict or quasi delict in the courts for the place where the harmful event occurred).
Held: Evans LJ said that the classification of the claims for English law was the starting point for consideration of whether they fell within Article 5(3). It was clear that such claims did not arise in tort.

Judges:

Evans, Waite LJJ, Sir Donald Nicholls VC

Citations:

[1995] FSR 795, [1995] IL Pr 568

Statutes:

Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedMetal und Rohstoff AG v Donaldson Lufkin and Jenrette Inc CA 27-Jan-1989
The claimants sued for negligent advice and secured judgment. The defendant company became insolvent, and so the plaintiff now sued the US parent company alleging conspiracy. The court considered a tort of malicious prosecution of a civil claim, . .

Cited by:

CitedDouglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others (No 3) CA 18-May-2005
The principal claimants sold the rights to take photographs of their wedding to a co-claimant magazine (OK). Persons acting on behalf of the defendants took unauthorised photographs which the defendants published. The claimants had retained joint . .
CitedGoogle Inc v Vidal-Hall and Others CA 27-Mar-2015
Damages for breach of Data Protection
The claimants sought damages alleging that Google had, without their consent, collected personal data about them, which was resold to advertisers. They used the Safari Internet browser on Apple products. The tracking and collation of the claimants’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Torts – Other

Updated: 12 December 2022; Ref: scu.225464

Armagas Ltd v Mundogas SA (‘The Ocean Frost’): CA 1985

Proof of corruption not needed for bribe

In establishing that money was paid as an improper inducement or bribe, proof of corruptness or a corrupt motive was unnecessary.
When a court looks at a decision of a judge at first instance, the court stressed the need to look at the objective facts and the overall probabilities.
Held: Mundogas was not vicariously liable for Mr. Magelssen’s deceit.
Goff LJ said: ‘Speaking from my own experience I have found it essential in cases of fraud when considering the credibility of witnesses always to test their veracity by reference to objective facts proved independently of their testimony, in particular by reference to the documents in the case and also to pay a particular regard to their motives and to the overall probabilities. It is frequently very difficult to tell whether a witness is telling the truth or not; and where there is a conflict of evidence . . Furthermore it is implicit in the statement of Lord MacMillan in Powell v. Streatham Manor Nursing Home at p. 256 that the probabilities and possibilities of the case may be such as to impel an appellate Court to depart from the opinion of the trial Judge formed upon his assessment of witnesses whom he has seen and heard in the witness box. Speaking from my own experience, I have found it essential in cases of fraud when considering the credibility of witnesses, always to test their veracity by reference to the objective facts proved independently of their testimony, in particular by reference to the documents, to the witnesses’ motives and to the overall probabilities can be of very great assistance to a judge in ascertaining the truth. I have been driven to the conclusion that the Judge did not pay sufficient regard to these matters in making his findings of fact in the present case.’
On the facts as found and ‘the effect of the judge’s conclusion was that, although Mr. Magelssen did not have ostensible authority to enter into the contract, he did have ostensible authority to tell Mr. Jensen and Mr. Dannesboe that he had obtained actual authority to do so. This is, on its face, a most surprising conclusion. It results in an extraordinary distinction between (1) a case where an agent, having no ostensible authority to enter into a relevant contract, wrongly asserts that he is invested with actual authority to do so, in which event the principal is not bound; and (2) a case where an agent, having no ostensible authority, wrongly asserts after negotiations that he has gone back to his principal and obtained actual authority, in which event the principal is bound. As a matter of common sense, this is most unlikely to be the law.’

Judges:

Goff LJ, Staughton J, Dunn J

Citations:

[1985] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 1, [1985] 1 WLR 640

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedHovenden and Sons v Millhoff 1900
Romer LJ said: ‘The courts of law in this country have always strongly condemned and, when they could, punished the bribing of agents, and have taken a strong view as to what constitutes a bribe. I believe the mercantile community as a whole . .
CitedIndustries and General Mortgage Co Ltd v Lewis 1949
When arranging with the plaintiff company to obtain a loan for the defendant V stipulated that he should be paid half the procuration fee which the defendant would be charged for the company’s services. The company knew that V was to receive from . .
AdoptedWatt (or Thomas) v Thomas HL 1947
When Scots Appellate Court may set decision aside
The House considered when it was appropriate for an appellate court in Scotland to set aside the judgment at first instance.
Lord Thankerton said: ‘(1) Where a question of fact has been tried by a judge without a jury, and there is no question . .

Cited by:

CitedDr Anya v University of Oxford and Another CA 22-Mar-2001
Discrimination – History of interactions relevant
When a tribunal considered whether the motive for an act was discriminatory, it should look not just at the act, but should make allowance for earlier acts which might throw more light on the act in question. The Tribunal should assess the totality . .
AdoptedGrace Shipping v CF Sharp and Co (Malaya) Pte Ltd PC 10-Dec-1986
(Singapore) When a court has to weigh the various and varying recollections of witnesses about what was said at meetings which occurred in the distant past, the surest guides are the contemporaneous documents and the overall probabilities.
Lord . .
AppliedNina Naicker Gow v Dr Rosemary Harker CA 31-Jul-2003
The defendant had taken a blood sample. The claimant asserted that because the needle had been inserted incorrectly she had suffered damage to her wrist.
Held: Guidance from cases involving allegations of fraud could be relevant when assessing . .
CitedNiru Battery Manufacturing Company, Bank Sepah Iran v Milestone Trading Limited CA 23-Oct-2003
The claimant had contracted to purchase lead from some of the defendants. There were delays in payment but when funds were made available they should have been repaid. An incorrect bill of lading was presented. The bill certified that the goods had . .
CitedDEG-Deutsche Investitions und Entwicklungsgesellschaft mbH v Koshy and Other (No 3); Gwembe Valley Development Co Ltd (in receivership) v Same (No 3) CA 28-Jul-2003
The company sought to recover damages from a director who had acted dishonestly, by concealing a financial interest in a different company which had made loans to the claimant company. He replied that the claim was out of time. At first instance the . .
Appeal fromArmagas Ltd v Mundogas SA (‘The Ocean Frost’) HL 22-May-1985
Ostensible authority creates estoppel
Apparent authority as agent can arise where an employer by words or conduct has represented that his employee, who has purported to act on behalf of the employer, is authorised to do what he is purporting to do. Ostensible authority depends on a . .
CitedFlannery and Another v Halifax Estate Agencies Ltd, Trading As Colleys Professional Services CA 18-Feb-1999
A judge at first instance taking a view on an expert’s report should give reasons in his judgment for that view. On appeal, where no reasons had been given, he should be asked to provide reasons by affidavit for the appeal. An inadequately reasoned . .
CitedFen and others v D’Cruz and others CA 13-Mar-2007
The parties disputed whether the first defendant had been held out to be a partner in the second defendant’s firm of solicitors. The first defendant had later absonded. Appeal dismissed. . .
CitedIn Re Selectmove Ltd CA 21-Dec-1993
Promisse to Pay Tax due is not Consideration
The company appealed against an order for its winding up, saying that the debt was disputed, an accomodation having been reached with the Revenue.
Held: The court declined to regard a promise to the Revenue by a company to pay its existing . .
CitedThornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd QBD 26-Jul-2011
The claimant alleged defamation and malicious falsehood in an article published and written by the defendants. She complained that she was said to have fabricated an interview with the second defendant for her book. An interview of sorts had now . .
AppliedGoodman v Faber Prest Steel CA 5-Mar-2013
The defendant appealed against the award of damages after being found liable for injuries caused in a road traffic accident. They disputed whether the injuries now complained of were the result of the accident.
Held: the appeal succeed and the . .
CitedNuttal and Another v Kerr and Another QBD 25-Jul-2019
The defendant sought to appeal from a judgment given only after a long delay.
Held: Permission to appeal was necessary, and given, but the appeal itself failed: ‘(1) There is no evidence of fault of the Judge at any or any material point other . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Torts – Other, Agency

Updated: 12 December 2022; Ref: scu.183409

Griffiths v Williams: CA 21 Nov 1995

The Defendant landlord had demanded rent arrears and said that if the Claimant did not do what he wanted he would evict her from her flat. He forcibly raped her and then fought a criminal trial, alleging that sexual relations had been consensual and calling witnesses to blacken the Claimant’s character.
Held: Damages of pounds 50,000 for a rape were correct. Rape is ‘in a quite different category from personal injury cases in general’. The victim had to go through a trial and deal with an allegation of consent. The sum included an element of aggravated damages.

Judges:

Millett LJ, Rose LJ

Citations:

Times 24-Nov-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedLawson v Glaves-Smith, Executor of the Estate of Dawes (Deceased) QBD 14-Nov-2006
The claimant sought damages saying that she had been falsely imprisoned, raped and drugged by the defendant who had since died.
Held: The court had only the evidence of the claimant, and must be careful in examining it. On that evidence the . .
CitedAT and others v Dulghieru and Another QBD 19-Feb-2009
The claimants had been subject to unlawful human trafficking. Their abductors had been imprisoned, and they now sought damages. The court was asked now to assess the damages to be awarded for sexual enslavement. Each claimant suffered chronic post . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Torts – Other

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.81048

UK Insurance Ltd v Gentry: QBD 18 Jan 2018

Calim for damages by insurance company claiming that a claim by the defendant on which it had paid had in fact been fraudulent. The claim was made in deceit.
Held: ‘I have the required very high level of confidence that the Claimant’s allegation is true and I am not left in doubt as to what happened. The Claimant is therefore entitled to judgment on its claim.’

Judges:

Teare J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 37 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedWisniewski v Central Manchester Health Authority CA 1997
The court considered the effect of a party failing to bring evidence in support of its case, as regards the court drawing inferences: ‘(1) In certain circumstances a court may be entitled to draw adverse inferences from the absence or silence of a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.603731

Otkritie International Investment Management Ltd and Others v Urumov and Others: ComC 10 Feb 2014

The claimants sought damages and asserted certain proprietary claims arising out of what they said were various acts of fraud and (in colloquial terms) ‘money-laundering’ activities committed towards the end of 2010 and in the course of 2011 by some or all of the defendants. In total, the alleged frauds are said to involve approximately US$ 175m.

Judges:

Eder J

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 191 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.521118

Bridgman And Skinner: 1744

When a defendant pleads that the plaintiff struck him first, how far he shall not be allowed to give in evidence a very violent battery by way of justification under that plea.

Citations:

[1744] EngR 350, (1744) 2 Barn KB 418, (1744) 94 ER 591 (C)

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.382206

OJSC Oil Company Yugraneft v Abramovich and others: ComC 29 Oct 2008

The claimants sought damages alleging a massive fraud by the defendants. The court considered whether the parties could receive a fair trial of the action in Russia.
Held: They could. Christopher Clarke J said: ‘Firstly, this case is in no way comparable to Cherney v Deripaska, [2008] EWHC 1530 (Comm), in which the claimant, a Russian exile and persona non grata in Russia, was given permission to serve out in circumstances where the agreement sued on, as a result of which he claimed a 20% interest in the largest aluminium company in the world, was made in England. The evidence gave grounds for believing that if the proceedings took place in Russia (a) he faced a greater risk of assassination (there having been a previous Russian originated attempt on his life); (b) there was a real risk that he might be arrested on trumped up charges; (c) and, because of the very close links between Mr Deripaska and the Russian state, he might very well not receive a fair trial. ‘
Here Yugraneft a Russian company, one of whose shareholders is the City of Moscow, is a seasoned litigator in Russia. It has not been without success. In the bankruptcy proceedings it has enjoyed complete success, as appears from the course of proceedings summarised in Appendix 5. It is open to it to appeal the investigator’s refusal but it has decided not to do so. Mr Kotov says that he did not initiate an appeal because he considered it likely that it would be dismissed for reasons unconnected with the merits of the complaint. This view appears to be based on a conversation reported to him by an officer at the Ministry of Internal affairs involved in pre-investigative research into the complaint which that officer had had with Mr Davidovich in which the latter had said that the investigation ‘has no prospects’, ‘does not mean anything’ and ‘will be closed anyway so there is no point in you talking to me’.
Professor Eksarkhopulo’s evidence indicates that there can be real problems in securing the prosecution of important people for economic crimes, and that a thriving practice has grown up known as ‘raiding’ whereby property is unlawfully seized in the belief that no criminal case will come of it as a result of the investigators’ incompetence or corruption. Yugraneft claims that there are well recognised problems of corruption in the Russian Courts. Presidents Putin and Medvedev have acknowledged as much, as has Valery Zorkin, the President of the Constitutional Court. In October 2004 he told Izvestiya that
‘the courts are very vulnerable to attack from business in the form of corruption. Bribe-taking in the courts has become one of the strongest corruption markets in Russia. Judicial corruption is built into various corruption networks operating at different levels of power: for example, networks for causing criminal cases to collapse and for taking over businesses’.
In May 2008 President Medvedev expressed the ‘particular concern of the state’ in relation to the ‘corruption in the law enforcement bodies and the judiciary’.
Reliance is placed on the evidence of Mr Vladimir Soloviev, a Russian broadcaster with a colourful background, who claims to be, inter alia, an investigative journalist. He refers to a failure by the Chairwoman of the Federal Arbitazh Court of Moscow Circuit to procure a prosecution against him for pointing out that she had obtained in dubious circumstances four apartments in Moscow, one of them at an undervalue from a party in a case before her at a cost of 50 times her judicial salary. He also refers to a defamation action brought by Mr V. Boyev, an adviser in the Presidential Department for personnel issues and State awards, who took exception to reports he made about the latter’s exercise of improper influence over judges. The action was withdrawn when he obtained the evidence of a judge that Mr Boyev had requested that she change her ruling and told her that if she did not her reappointment as Deputy Chairwoman was in jeopardy.
I have no doubt that Russia has had, and has, corruption problems with some of its judges; and that there is a widespread public perception of judicial corruption and political interference in the judicial process: see ‘Striving for Judicial Independence’, IBA Human Rights Institute Report, June 2005. Professor Eskarkhopulo gives evidence of specific examples of judicial corruption in his second report. I am equally clear that there are many judges who are not corrupt. The evidence is insufficient to persuade me that, if there was an appeal from the investigator’s refusal to initiate a prosecution, it would be likely to be determined contrary to its merits because Yugraneft was the complainant or because Mr Davidovich, Mr Matevosov or Mr Abramovich were the respondents. The litigation in which Yugraneft has so far engaged does not bear tell tale indicia of impropriety such as repeated determinations of different cases by the same judge without good reason, departure from normal curial practice, irrational conclusions or the like. Since Yugraneft has not attempted to appeal the Investigator’s refusals it is not possible to know what a Russian judge would make of the submissions cogently advanced before me in reliance on Professor Eskarkhopulo’s material, or to say that, in the event of a favourable judicial ruling, a subsequent prosecution would, for improper reasons, be doomed never to take place.
Lastly, if and insofar as reliance is placed upon the unsatisfactory nature of a system in which claims based on commercial fraud must await the outcome of a criminal prosecution which may never be brought, that is a characteristic of Russian law under which Sibir and Yugraneft, (behind which there lies, amongst others, the City of Moscow) and Mr Abramovich have chosen to do business. It was at one time part of English law so far as felonies were concerned.’

Judges:

Christopher Clarke J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 2613 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2201)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedPacific International Sports Clubs Ltd v Soccer Marketing International Ltd and Others ChD 24-Jul-2009
The parties disputed ownership of shares in the football club Dynamo Kiev. Claims were to be made under Ukrainian company law and in equity. The claimant (a company registered in Mauritius) sought to proceed here. The defendants (largely companies . .
CitedVarsani v Relfo Ltd CA 27-May-2010
The defendant appealed against refusal of a declaration that the court had no jurisdiction to hear the claim. He said that he lived in Kenya, and the claimant had failed first to apply for leave to serve out of the jurisdiction. The claimant had . .
CitedCalzaghe v Warren QBD 20-Jan-2010
The claimant boxer had secured judgement for fight fees from a company operated by the respondent manager and promoter. After the judgment the defendant had put the company into administration. The claimant now sought payment from the defendant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Jurisdiction

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.277338

Rex v De Berenger: 1814

The defendants were successfully prosecuted for conspiring by false rumours to raise the price of the public funds, causing loss to those who bought during this temporary rise.

Citations:

(1814) 3 M and S 67

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedNorris v United States of America and others HL 12-Mar-2008
The detainee appealed an order for extradition to the USA, saying that the offence (price-fixing) was not one known to English common law. The USA sought his extradition under the provisions of the Sherman Act.
Held: It was not, and it would . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.270741

Dugdale v Lovering: 1875

The court adopted the position proposed by Mr Cave, for the Plaintiff: ‘It is a general principle of law when an act is done by one person at the request of another which act is not in itself manifestly tortious to the knowledge of the person doing it, and such act turns out to be injurious to the rights of a third party, the person doing it is entitled to an indemnity from him who requested that it should be done’.

Citations:

[1875] LR 10 CP 196

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

ApprovedCorporation of Sheffield v Barclay and Others HL 3-Jul-1905
Lord Davey said: ‘I think that the appellants [Sheffield Corporation] have a statutory duty to register all valid transfers, and on the demand of the transferee to issue to him a fresh certificate of title to the stock comprised therein. But, of . .
CitedCadbury Schweppes Plc and Another v Halifax Share Dealing Ltd and Another ChD 23-May-2006
Fraudsters had successfully contrived to sell shares of others, by re-registering the shares to new addresses and requesting new certificates. The question was which of the company, the company registrars and the stockbrokers should bear the loss. . .
CitedStanley Yeung Kai Yung and another v Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation PC 1980
The shareholder had had his share certificates stolen. The thief lodged forged transfers with stockbrokers, who in good faith sent the share certificates and transfer deeds to the bank for registration and transfer, which was done. The transferee . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.242169

Whitelegg v Richards: 1823

A debtor had been imprisoned to coerce him to pay his debt to the plaintiff. The defendant, a court clerk, ordered him to be released. The plaintiff said this was ‘wrongfully and maliciously intending to injure the plaintiff’. Abbott CJ recorded: ‘On the argument before us, some authorities were quoted to shew, that an action upon the case may be maintained against an officer of a Court for a falsity or misconduct in his office, whereby a party sustains a special damage; and that, in this case, a damage was plainly shewn by the loss of the means of enforcing payment from the debtor, as in actions against sheriffs or gaolers for an escape. It is not necessary to repeat the authorities quoted. The general principle was not contraverted’. Damage was regarded as the gist of the action.

Judges:

Abbott CJ

Citations:

(1823) 2 B and C 45

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedWatkins v Home Office and others HL 29-Mar-2006
The claimant complained of misfeasance in public office by the prisons for having opened and read protected correspondence whilst he was in prison. The respondent argued that he had suffered no loss. The judge had found that bad faith was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – other, Damages

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.239995

Bakhitar v Keosghgerian and Others: QBD 3 Dec 2003

Employer liable for employee with criminal record

An employee of a firm of solicitors took pawned jewellery to show to a third party possible purchaser. The jewels were misappropriated.
Held: The person involved, who was known to have a criminal record for fraud was for all relevant purposes the firm’s employee, and they had vicarious liability for his behaviour.

Judges:

Overend J

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 3084 (QB)

Statutes:

Partnership Act 1890 5

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedDubai Aluminium Company Limited v Salaam and Others HL 5-Dec-2002
Partners Liable for Dishonest Act of Solicitor
A solicitor had been alleged to have acted dishonestly, having assisted in a fraudulent breach of trust by drafting certain documents. Contributions to the damages were sought from his partners.
Held: The acts complained of were so close to . .
CitedCochlan v Ruberella Limited CA 21-Jul-2003
The issue arose as to the liability of a firm for the acts of a partner who had made statements to the claimant regarding the rate of return on a proposed investment amounting to some 6,000 per cent per annum.
Held: The following propositions . .
CitedArmagas Ltd v Mundogas SA (‘The Ocean Frost’) HL 22-May-1985
Ostensible authority creates estoppel
Apparent authority as agent can arise where an employer by words or conduct has represented that his employee, who has purported to act on behalf of the employer, is authorised to do what he is purporting to do. Ostensible authority depends on a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Torts – Other, Vicarious Liability

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.193837

AO v The Home Office: QBD 30 Apr 2021

The Claimant was an Afghan national seeking declarations that he was falsely imprisoned and unlawfully detained by the Secretary of State for the Home Department and that he was released to street homelessness in breach of Article 3 ECHR. He seeks damages for false imprisonment and for breach of his Convention rights.

Judges:

Mr Justice Morris

Citations:

[2021] EWHC 1043 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other, Human Rights

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.662420

Yates v The Queen: CA 1885

The Court considered whether a procedural step taken towards bringing a (criminal) libel action amounted to the commencement of a ‘criminal prosecution’ within the meaning of s.3 of the 1881 Act.

Citations:

(1885) 14 QBD 687

Statutes:

Newspaper Libel and Registration Act 1881 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedCXZ v ZXC QBD 26-Jun-2020
Malicious Prosecution needs court involvement
W had made false allegations against her husband of child sex abuse to police. He sued in malicious prosecution. She applied to strike out, and he replied saying that as a developing area of law a strike out was inappropriate.
Held: The claim . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Media

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.652135

Sallows v Griffiths: CA 2001

An allegation was made of malicious abuse of the legal process by procuring of the arrest of the claimant. The defendant, Mr Griffiths, made a false statement about his business associate Mr Sallows to three recipients within their company. The statement alleged Mr Sallows had acted deceptively towards Mr Griffiths, and led to his summary dismissal at a board meeting. The defendant had falsely and maliciously given a police officer information that the claimant had been guilty of a criminal offence, thereby procuring his arrest. The charges were over his head for six months before being dropped.
Held: The defendant was liable in tort. Damages for the injurious falsehood were available because Mr Sallows had already been compensated for his wrongful dismissal through employment law mechanisms and there was no evidence he would be likely to suffer any other damage from publication to the three internal recipients.

Judges:

Beldam LJ, Staughton LJ

Citations:

[2001] FSR 15

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedCXZ v ZXC QBD 26-Jun-2020
Malicious Prosecution needs court involvement
W had made false allegations against her husband of child sex abuse to police. He sued in malicious prosecution. She applied to strike out, and he replied saying that as a developing area of law a strike out was inappropriate.
Held: The claim . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.652136

Various Claimants v News Group Newspapers Ltd: ChD 19 Jun 2020

Defendant’s strike out application – limitation

Judges:

Mann J

Citations:

[2020] EWHC 1593 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980 32

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoVarious Claimants v News Group Newspapers Ltd (1436) ChD 4-Jun-2020
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Torts – Other

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.651921

CFC 26 Ltd v Brown Shipley and Co Ltd and Others: ChD 29 Nov 2016

Complaint of the alleged sale of an underlease at a low price, working as a corrupt agreement. It was said that one of the defendants, a local council, was liable for malicious prosecution of an enforcement notice. The Council’s replied that the tort ‘cannot apply in relation to the mere service of an enforcement notice’ because, as it is put in Clerk and Lindsell: ‘To prosecute is to set the law in motion and the law is only set in motion by an appeal to some person clothed with judicial authority in regard to the matter in question.’ The Council argued that the service of an enforcement notice involved no ‘appeal to some person clothed in judicial authority’
Held: Neey J said: ‘In my view, [Counsel for the Council] is right on this point. While it is now clear that the tort of malicious prosecution can apply without a criminal prosecution, there remains a requirement that the law has been ‘set in motion by an appeal to some person clothed with judicial authority’ and service of an enforcement notice cannot, as it seems to me, suffice for this purpose. I do not see Churchill v Siggers as providing authority to the contrary.’

Judges:

Newey J

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 3048 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedCXZ v ZXC QBD 26-Jun-2020
Malicious Prosecution needs court involvement
W had made false allegations against her husband of child sex abuse to police. He sued in malicious prosecution. She applied to strike out, and he replied saying that as a developing area of law a strike out was inappropriate.
Held: The claim . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Negligence, Commercial

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.571982

Bridgeman v Green: 1755

The court was asked whether certain money, which had been obtained by fraud, ought to be returned to the Plaintiff by a party who had received it, but who was not a party to the fraud.

Citations:

[1755] 2 Ves Sen 627

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

AffirmedBridgeman v Green 1757
The question before the court was whether certain money, which had been obtained by fraud, ought to be returned to the Plaintiff by a party who had received it, but who was not a party to the fraud. Lord Commissioner Wilmot said, ‘Whoever receives . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.448290

Gray v Crown Prosecution Service: QBD 20 Aug 2010

Allegation effectively claiming negligence and malicious prosecution against the Defendant in relation to charges which led to him standing trial in a Magistrates Court on various days; he was acquitted of all charges. By application he sought a finding that a CPS officer be committed for contempt and that the Defence is struck out. The Defendant applies for summary judgement against Mr Gray and to strike out the Claim.

Judges:

Mr Justice Akenhead

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 2144 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.424878

Rex v Tabbart: 1693

The plaintiff desired the defendant who had come into his house to leave it and accordingly commanded that his wife put the defendant out, molliter manus imposuit – using the minimum force necessary.

Citations:

[1693] Skinner 387

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Burns, Paul CACD 27-Apr-2010
The defendant appealed against his conviction for assault. He had picked up a sex worker, driven away, but then changed his mind, and forcibly removed her from the car when she delayed. He now argued that he had the same right at common law to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.416710

Rex v Sandford: 1647

A magistrate may arrest somebody committing an affray in his presence. He may be held pending a warrant which must be in writing and sent to the gaoler.

Citations:

(1647) 1 Hale PC 587, (1647) 2 Hale PC 122

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other, Magistrates

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.259605

Orton v Butler: 3 May 1822

A count stating that defendant had and received to the use of the plaintiff a certain sum of money, to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiff upon request ; and the non-payment upon request, and that the defendant converted and disposed thereof to his own use, is bad upon demurrer. Conversion does not lie for money, taken and received as currency.

Citations:

(1822) 5 B and Ald 652, [1822] EngR 285, (1822) 5 B and A 652, (1822) 106 ER 1329

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedLipkin Gorman (a Firm) v Karpnale Ltd HL 6-Jun-1991
The plaintiff firm of solicitors sought to recover money which had been stolen from them by a partner, and then gambled away with the defendant. He had purchased their gaming chips, and the plaintiff argued that these, being gambling debts, were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.259402

Miller v Race: 1758

A bank note made out to bearer and payable on demand was to be treated as currency. Conversion did not lie because there is no property in currency. Lord Mansfield said: ‘So, in the case of money stolen, the true owner cannot recover it, after it has been paid away fairly and honestly upon a valuable and bona fide consideration: but before money has passed in currency, an action may be brought for the money itself.’

Judges:

Lord Mansfield

Citations:

(1758) 1 Burr 452

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedLipkin Gorman (a Firm) v Karpnale Ltd HL 6-Jun-1991
The plaintiff firm of solicitors sought to recover money which had been stolen from them by a partner, and then gambled away with the defendant. He had purchased their gaming chips, and the plaintiff argued that these, being gambling debts, were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.259404

369413 Alberta Ltd v Pocklington: 21 Nov 2000

(Court of Appeal of Alberta) The court set out a number of propositions as to the intention required for inducing a breach of contract. These included inferred intention and recklessness. The Court of Appeal held as follows: ‘In order to find liability [for inference with contractual relations], a plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant had an ‘intent’ to induce the breach of contract. The intent component of the tort is the most difficult to understand. Malicious motive, unlawful conduct, hatred or intention to harm are not required elements of intent: Allen v Flood, [1898] AC 1 9H.L.(E,));Parks West Mall Ltd v Jennett (1996), 36 Alta.L.R. (3d) 44 (C.A.) at 49; and Atcheson v College of Physicians and Surgeons (Alberta), [1994] 6 W.W.R. 239 (Alta.Q.B) at 246. However, what is required is less clear. The requisite intent has been described with ‘loose, vague and conflicting statements’ that sometime appear to be irreconcilable: Ed Miller Sales, supra, at 230.

Originally, the tort required the breach to be the result of wilful, deliberate and direct conduct which the defendant knew or hoped would result in a violation of the plaintiff’s contractual rights. See for example, Lumley v Gye (1853), 118 E.R. 749, 2 El. and B1.216 (Q.B); and Quinn v Leathem, [1901] A.C.495 (H.L.(I.)).

However, courts soon recognized that intent can also be inferred when the consequences of the conduct were a necessary or reasonable foreseeable result, because ‘people are presumed to intend the reasonable consequences of their acts’: South Wales Miners’ Federation v Glamorgan Coal Company, [1905]A.C.239 (H.L.(E.)) at 244. In Posluns v Toronto Stock Exchange and Gardiner (1965), 46 D.L.R. (2d) 210 (Ont. H.C) at 267; affirmed (1966), 53 D.L.R (2d) 193 (C.A.); affirmed [1968] S.C.R. 330, 67 D.L.R. (2d) 165, the court held that liability would attach if the defendant’s conduct resulted in the breach of a contract ‘of which it was or ought to have been aware’. The intention to bring about a breach of contract need not be the primary object; it is sufficient if the interference is necessarily incidental to attaining the defendant’s primary objective: Fraser v Board of Trustees of Central United Church (1983), 38 O.R. (2d) 97 (H.C.J.) at 103′ and Bank of Nova Scotia v Gaudreau (1985), 48 O.R. (2d) 478 (H.C.J.). [41] Intention can also be established when the defendant was reckless or wilfully blind to a breach. The defendant need not have actually known the precise terms of the contract or that his object only could be accomplished through breach of the contract. ‘If – turning a blind eye – he went about it regardless of whether it would involve a breach, he will be treated just as if he had knowingly procured it’: J.G. Fleming, The Law of Torts, 8th Ed. (Sydney: law Book Co., 1992) at 694.

Turning a blind eye may include situations in which the defendant failed to seek advice or employ the means available to obtain the necessary knowledge. For example, in Royal Bank of Canada v Wilton (1995), 165 A.R. 261, D.L.R. (4th) 266 (C.A.), the defendant was uncertain about the enforceability of a contract, had the ‘means of knowledge’ to determine if a legitimate contract existed, but made no efforts to seek advice. This court found the defendant liable because he deliberately chose not to acquire the information, but proceeded on the basis that the contract was unenforceable. Similarly, when there are competing legal interpretations and the defendant adopts an interpretation which will interfere with the plaintiff’s rights, the defendant ‘must at least show that he was advised and honestly believed that he was legally entitled to take that course’: Swiss Bank v Lloyds Bank, [1979] Ch.548 at 580 (CH.D.); reversed on other grounds [1982] A.C. 584 (C.A.); affirmed [1982] A.C. 604 (H.L.(E)).
If the defendant acted under a bona fide belief that contractual rights would not be infringed, liability will not be found even though the belief turned out to be mistaken. But for a mistaken belief to be bona fide, rather than the result of recklessness or wilful blindness, some basis for the belief must exist, and some reasonable effort must have been made by the defendant to learn the truth. In British Industrial Plastics Ltd. v Ferguson, [1940] 1 All E.R. 479 (H.L.(E.)), the defendants who had made the effort to seek advice were not found liable even though their belief was described as ‘illogical’. In Z-Mark International Inc. v Leng Novak Inc. (1996), 12 O.T.C. 33 (Gen. Div.), appeal dismissed (1999), 122 O.A.C. 341, a defendant made inquiries and obtained assurances and a warranty. The court found that the defendant had no reason to doubt the assurance or the warranty and therefore the defendant was not knowingly or recklessly indifferent to a breach of contract.

In some cases a distinction is drawn between direct interference, for which the breach must be foreseeable or reasonable consequence of the conduct, and indirect interference, for which the breach must be necessary or substantially certain consequence. See, for example, L.N. Klar, Tort Law, 2nd ed. (Scarborough: Carswell, 1996) at 498 and 507; Fleming, supra, at 694; D.C. Thomson and Co. Ltd. V Deakin ,[1952] Ch. 646 (C.A.); Bank of Nova Scotia, supra; Garry v Sherritt Gordon Mines Ltd., [1988] 1 W.W.R. 289, 45 D.L.R. (4d) 22 (Sask. C.A.); and Atcheson, supra.

[45] As this case involves direct interference, this distinction does not arise. Pocklington, as the director of Gainers, executed the documents to complete the transfer of the 350151 shares to his own company. The transfer caused Gainers to breach s. 12.03(1) of the Master Agreement, which prohibited dispositions of assets without Alberta’s consent. Therefore, if the breach was a reasonable or foreseeable consequence of that transfer, or alternatively, if Pocklington completed the transfer recklessly, was wilfully blind to its consequences, or was indifferent as to whether or not it caused a breach, the necessary intent element for the tort will be met.’

Citations:

(2001) 194 DLR (4th) 109

Links:

Canlii

Jurisdiction:

Canada

Cited by:

CitedMainstream Properties Ltd v Young and others CA 13-Jul-2005
The claimant appealed refusal of his claim for inducing a breach of contract against the sixth defendant. It said that an intention to disturb a contract could be inferred.
Held: A mere recklessness as to whether contractual rights were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Contract, Torts – Other

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.229818

Shadgett v Clipson: 1807

A sheriff’s officer could not justify an imprisonment of A. B. under a latitat against C. B. though it was averred that A. B. and C. B., are one and the same person, there being no averment that A. B. was known by the name of C. B.

Citations:

(1807) 8 East 328

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHoye v Bush 1841
A constable applied for a warrant for the arrest of Richard Hoye, but the justice mistakenly issued a warrant for the arrest of John Hoye, which was the name of Richard Hoye’s father. The constable arrested Richard Hoye, who sued for false . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.229687

Tempest v Snowden: 1952

Decision too charge – whether was warranted

A custody officer is not required to be sure that the accused person is guilty before charging him, but rather he should believe that a charge is warranted

Citations:

[1952] 1 KBD 130

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedGlinski v McIver HL 1962
The court considered the tort of malicious prosecution when committed by a police officer, saying ‘But these cases must be carefully watched so as to see that there really is some evidence from his conduct that he knew it was a groundless charge.’ . .
CitedSinclair v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire and British Telecommunications Plc CA 12-Dec-2000
The claimant had been prosecuted, but the charge was dismissed as an abuse of process. He now appealed a strike out of his civil claim for damages for malicious prosecution.
Held: The appeal failed. The decision to dismiss the criminal charge . .
CitedHowarth v Gwent Constabulary and Another QBD 1-Nov-2011
The claimant alleged malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office against the defendant. He had been charged with perverting the course of justice. He had worked for a firm of solicitors specialising in defending road traffic prosecutions. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.183663

Yukong Lines Ltd v Rendsburg Investments Corporation and Others (No 2): QBD 23 Sep 1997

Repudiation by charterer: Funds were transferred by a charterer’s ‘alter ego’ to another company controlled by him with intent to defeat owner’s claim – whether ‘alter ego’ acting as undisclosed principal of charterer – whether permissible to pierce corporate veil – whether actionable conspiracy. A company creditor is owed no direct duty by a director putting his assets beyond the jurisdiction anticipating the company’s insolvency. In an unlawful means conspiracy, the unlawful act relied on must be actionable at the suit of the plaintiff: ‘As to an unlawful means conspiracy, Mr. Yamvrias undoubtedly owed a fiduciary duty to Rendsburg. Although he was not formally a director, he was a ‘shadow director’ and controlled the company’s activities.’ and ‘. . since Mr Yamvrias had effective control over Rendsburg, he would presumably have been in a position on behalf of the company to get back from himself that which he had caused to be paid for his benefit. It might in an appropriate case be within the scope of the Court’s Mareva jurisdiction to require a company, and its only effective officer, to do just that; but that has not been the subject of argument.’

Judges:

Justice Toulson

Citations:

Times 30-Oct-1997, [1998] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 322, [1998] 1 WLR 294, [1998] 4 All ER 82, [1998] 2 BCLC 485, [1998] BCC 870

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed toYukong Lines of Korea v Rendsburg Investments Corporation of Liberia CA 4-Jun-1998
. .
See AlsoYukong Lines v Rendsburg Investment Corporation CA 17-Oct-1996
An order for cross examination in an application for a Mareva order is exceptional, but permissible if it is just and convenient that such an order should be made. In applying the test of whether it would be ‘just and convenient’ to make the order, . .

Cited by:

CitedMahonia Limited v JP Morgan Chase Bankwest Lb Ag QBD 3-Aug-2004
The Claimant claimed on a letter of credit issued by the Defendant on behalf of Enron Ltd, who asserted it was not liable to pay there having been unlawful behaviour by Enron Ltd. Swap agreements had been entered into, and the defendant said the . .
Appeal fromYukong Lines of Korea v Rendsburg Investments Corporation of Liberia CA 4-Jun-1998
. .
CitedUltraframe (UK) Ltd v Fielding and others ChD 27-Jul-2005
The parties had engaged in a bitter 95 day trial in which allegations of forgery, theft, false accounting, blackmail and arson. A company owning patents and other rights had become insolvent, and the real concern was the destination and ownership of . .
CitedTotal Network Sl v Revenue and Customs HL 12-Mar-2008
The House was asked whether an action for unlawful means conspiracy was available against a participant in a missing trader intra-community, or carousel, fraud. The company appealed a finding of liability saying that the VAT Act and Regulations . .
CitedBen Hashem v Ali Shayif and Another FD 22-Sep-2008
The court was asked to pierce the veil of incorporation of a company in the course of ancillary relief proceedings in a divorce. H had failed to co-operate with the court.
After a comprehensive review of all the authorities, Munby J said: ‘The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, Torts – Other

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.90681

HM Revenue and Customs v Begum and Others: ChD 15 Jul 2010

The Commissioners claim was founded in an alleged conspiracy from a ‘missing trader intra-community fraud’ amounting to andpound;96 million.
Held: Section 423 had extra territorial effect.

Judges:

David Richards J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 1799 (Ch), [2011] BPIR 59

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Insolvency Act 1986 423

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegalway Care Ltd v Shillingford and others ChD 25-Feb-2005
Applications to vary freezing order. Blackburne J set out a description of the workings of missing trader intra-community VAT carousel frauds. . .

Cited by:

CitedBilta (UK) Ltd and Others v Nazir and Others ChD 30-Jul-2012
The company was said to have engaged in a fraud based on false European Trading Scheme Allowances, and had been wound up by the Revenue. The liquidators, in the company name, now sought recovery from former directors and associates.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, VAT, Insolvency, Jurisdiction

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.420810

Capper v Chaney and Another: ChD 8 Jul 2010

Police had seized substantial sums of cash from the first defendant acting under the 2004 Act. The claimant said that andpound;250,00 was his and sought its return. The Commissioner argued that the current proceedings were an abuse of process.
Held: Forfeiture proceedings were now under way, and any release must await the result. The question in those proceedings would be whether the cash was derived from unlawful conduct. The issue before this court was ownership. However the claim sought recovery of cash, and the 2002 Act assigned the resolution of disputes about cash alleged to represent the proceeds of crime to the magistrates’ court (and on appeal the Crown Court). The essence of the issues before the magistrates would in fact be the ownership of the cash, and therefore these proceedigs were an attempt to pre-empt the magistrates and were an abuse. The claim was struck out.

Judges:

Lewison J

Citations:

(2010) 174 JP 377, [2010] EWHC 1704 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 Part 5, Magistrates’ Courts (Detention and Forfeiture of Cash) Rules 2002 1191)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedBarraclough v Brown HL 1897
The 1889 Act gave statutory undertakers who had incurred expenditure in removing a sunken vessel a right ‘to recover such expenses from the owner of such vessel in a court of summary jurisdiction.’ the undertakers began their action in the High . .
AppliedGlaxo Group Ltd and Others v Inland Revenue Commissioners ChD 21-Nov-1995
A tax adjustment can be made by the Inland Revenue on an open assessment following transfer pricing enquiry and direction, even after many years. The court considered that the jurisdiction of the special and the general commissioners to determine . .
CitedHorner v Franklin 1905
. .
CitedRegina v Derby Magistrates Court Ex Parte B HL 19-Oct-1995
No Breach of Solicitor Client Confidence Allowed
B was charged with the murder of a young girl. He made a confession to the police, but later changed his story, saying his stepfather had killed the girl. He was acquitted. The stepfather was then charged with the murder. At his committal for trial, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other, Magistrates

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.420428

Hunt v AB: CA 22 Oct 2009

The claimant sought damages from a woman in malicious prosecution, saying that she had made a false allegation of rape against him. He had served two years in prison.
Held: The claim failed. A complainant is not a prosecutor, and is not liable for the decision to prosecute. To become liable it has to be shown that the complainant had deliberately manipulated the prosecutors into a position which they would otherwise not have taken. In this case it was the police who had approached the defendant to encourage a complaint.
Moore-Bick LJ said: ‘In Martin v Watson Lord Keith, having approved the statement of principle in Clerk and Lindsell to which I have referred, identified at page 80E of the report the question at issue as being ‘whether or not the defendant is properly to be regarded, in all the circumstances, as having set the law in motion against the plaintiff.’ In my view, it is essential for a correct understanding of later passages in his Lordship’s speech to keep that question well in mind . . I think it is clear from Lord Keith’s speech and from the authorities to which he referred that the concept of ‘setting the law in motion’ requires something more than merely making a complaint or report which suggests that an offence has been committed; it also involves active steps of some kind to ensure that a prosecution ensues (what Richardson J in Commercial Union Assurance Co of New Zealand Ltd v Lamont [1989] 3 NZLR 187 at page 199 described as ‘procuring the use of the power of the state’). Invoking the power of the state against the claimant is central to the tort of malicious prosecution and requires a positive desire and intention to procure a prosecution. In effect, it must be the defendant’s purpose to bring about a prosecution and that purpose must be translated into actions which are effective in bringing about proceedings. . . ‘

Judges:

Sedley LJ, Wall LJ, Moore-Bick LJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 1092, Times 27-Oct-2009

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedDanby v Beardsley 1880
The court heard a claim of malicious prosecution.
Held: A person who is not a party to a prosecution but actively puts the criminal process in motion may be liable for malicious prosecution.
Where an individual falsely and maliciously . .
CitedMartin v Watson CA 26-Jan-1994
The claimant sought damages for malicious prosecution, saying that the defendant had made a complaint to the police knowing it to be false that the claimant had indecently exposed himself. Acting on the complaint the police had arrested and charged . .
CitedMahon, Kent v Dr Rahn, Biedermann, Haab-Biedermann, Rahn, and Bodmer (a Partnership) (No 2) CA 8-Jun-2000
The defendant’s lawyers wrote to a financial services regulatory body investigating the possible fraudulent conduct of the plaintiff’s stockbroking firm. The letter was passed to the Serious Fraud Office who later brought criminal proceedings . .
CitedMartin v Watson HL 13-Jul-1995
The plaintiff had been falsely reported to the police by the defendant, a neighbour, for indecent exposure whilst standing on a ladder in his garden. He had been arrested and charged, but at a hearing before the Magistrates’ Court, the Crown . .

Cited by:

CitedCommissioner of Police of The Metropolis v Copeland CA 22-Jul-2014
The defendant appealed against the award of damages for assault, false imprisonment and malicious prosection, saying that the question posed for the jury were misdirections, and that the jury’s decision was perverse. The claimant was attending the . .
CitedCXZ v ZXC QBD 26-Jun-2020
Malicious Prosecution needs court involvement
W had made false allegations against her husband of child sex abuse to police. He sued in malicious prosecution. She applied to strike out, and he replied saying that as a developing area of law a strike out was inappropriate.
Held: The claim . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Police

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.377234

Chandelor v Lopus: 1603

The plaintiff sued for an alleged misrepresentation as to the character of a precious stone sold to him.
Held: The plaintiff must either declare on a contract, or if he declared in tort for a misrepresentation must aver a scienter.

Citations:

(1603) Cro Jac 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHeilbut Symons and Co v Buckleton HL 11-Nov-1912
In an action of damages for fraudulent misrepresentation and breach of warranty, the plaintiff founded on a conversation between himself and the defendants’ representative. In this conversation the plaintiff said-‘I understand that you are bringing . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.266988

Medina v Stoughton: 1699

Citations:

(1699) Salk 210

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHeilbut Symons and Co v Buckleton HL 11-Nov-1912
In an action of damages for fraudulent misrepresentation and breach of warranty, the plaintiff founded on a conversation between himself and the defendants’ representative. In this conversation the plaintiff said-‘I understand that you are bringing . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.266990

Foster v Green: 1862

Cash may not be subject to a claim for conversion.

Citations:

(1862) 7 H and N 881

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedLipkin Gorman (a Firm) v Karpnale Ltd HL 6-Jun-1991
The plaintiff firm of solicitors sought to recover money which had been stolen from them by a partner, and then gambled away with the defendant. He had purchased their gaming chips, and the plaintiff argued that these, being gambling debts, were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.259403

Hooper v Lane: 1847

A man taken prisoner is entitled to know why. Lord Cranworth said: ‘The sheriff is bound, when he executes the writ, to make known the ground of the arrest, in order, among other reasons, that the person arrested may know whether he is or is not bound to submit to the arrest.’

Judges:

Lord Cranworth

Citations:

[1847] 6 HLC 443, [1847] 10 QB 546

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedChristie v Leachinsky HL 25-Mar-1947
Arrested Person must be told basis of the Arrest
Police officers appealed against a finding of false imprisonment. The plaintiff had been arrested under the 1921 Act, but this provided no power of arrest (which the appellant knew). The officers might lawfully have arrested the plaintiff for the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.259578

Sharrock v Hannemer: 1595

A constable without a warrant may not arrest somebody for an affray which he did not himself witness, unless a felony is likely to follow.

Citations:

(1595) Cro Eliz 375, (1595) 78 ER 622

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.259606

Barretts and Baird (Wholesale) Ltd v Institution of Professional Civil Servants (IPCS): 1986

A strike by civil servants in the Ministry of Agriculture in support of a pay claim was not intended to cause damage to an abattoir which was unable to obtain the certificates necessary for exporting meat and claiming subsidies. The damage to the abattoir was neither the purpose of the strike nor the means of achieving that purpose, which was to put pressure on the government.

Judges:

Henry J

Citations:

[1986] IRLR 331

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

ApprovedVan Camp Chocolates Ltd v Aulesbrooks Ltd 1984
(New Zealand Court of Appeal) The plaintiffs sued for interference with their business by unlawful means, namely breach of confidence. A preliminary point of law was argued as to the nature of the intent to injure the plaintiffs necessary to . .

Cited by:

CitedDouglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others (No 3) CA 18-May-2005
The principal claimants sold the rights to take photographs of their wedding to a co-claimant magazine (OK). Persons acting on behalf of the defendants took unauthorised photographs which the defendants published. The claimants had retained joint . .
CitedDouglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others; similar HL 2-May-2007
In Douglas, the claimants said that the defendants had interfered with their contract to provide exclusive photographs of their wedding to a competing magazine, by arranging for a third party to infiltrate and take and sell unauthorised photographs. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Employment

Updated: 06 December 2022; Ref: scu.225470

Cruddas v Calvert and Others: QBD 1 May 2013

Application for leave to amend particulars of claim.

Judges:

Nicol J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 1096 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See AlsoCruddas v Calvert and Others QBD 5-Jun-2013
. .
See AlsoCruddas v Calvert and Others CA 21-Jun-2013
The claimant sought damages alleging both defamation and malicious falsehood. The parties appealed against the ruling that in a malicious falsehood claim, the court would accept mutiple meanings of the words used. . .
See AlsoCruddas v Calvert and Others QBD 26-Jun-2013
. .
See AlsoCruddas v Calvert and Others QBD 31-Jul-2013
Judgment on the second stage of the trial of a claim for libel and malicious falsehood.
Held: Tugendhat J adopted the meaning ‘more likely than not to cause pecuniary damage’ for ‘calculated to’. . .
See AlsoCalvert and Others v Cruddas CA 16-Apr-2014
Renewed application for leave to appeal against damages award in defamation and malicious falsehood. The defendant newspaper had published critical articles, derived from recordings made by undercover reporters, and pleaded justification.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Torts – Other

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.491919

Tampion v Anderson: 1973

(Full Court of Victoria)

Citations:

[1973] VR 715

Jurisdiction:

Australia

Citing:

ApprovedFarrington v Thomson and Bridgland 1959
(Supreme Court of Victoria) Smith J said: ‘Proof of damage is, of course, necessary in addition. In my view, therefore, the rule should be taken to go this far at least, that if a public officer does an act which, to his knowledge, amounts to an . .

Cited by:

MentionedWatkins v Home Office and others HL 29-Mar-2006
The claimant complained of misfeasance in public office by the prisons for having opened and read protected correspondence whilst he was in prison. The respondent argued that he had suffered no loss. The judge had found that bad faith was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.240000

Cole v Hindson: 1795

A policeman could not justify taking a person by the name mentioned in the warrant, his real name being different. The plea averred that Aquila Cole and Richard Cole were the same person.

Citations:

(1795) 6 TR 234

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHoye v Bush 1841
A constable applied for a warrant for the arrest of Richard Hoye, but the justice mistakenly issued a warrant for the arrest of John Hoye, which was the name of Richard Hoye’s father. The constable arrested Richard Hoye, who sued for false . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Police

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.229686

Toumia v Evans (Secretary General of the Prison Officers Association: CA 12 Mar 1999

A prisoner had an arguable case for false imprisonment against a prison officers union who advocated industrial action resulting in him being locked in his cell for much longer than normal. A judge was wrong to hear an appeal without notifying the parties.

Citations:

Times 01-Apr-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 965

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedPrison Officers Association v Iqbal CA 4-Dec-2009
The claimant, a prisoner, alleged false imprisonment. The prison officers had taken unlawful strike action leaving him to be confined within his cell and unable to be involved in his normal activities. In view of the strike, a governor’s order had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.145880

Surzur Overseas Ltd v Koros and others: CA 25 Feb 1999

A defendant to a worldwide Mareva injunction had failed to give full disclosure of all his assets in an affidavit filed with the court. False evidence as to sale of the assets in question was later manufactured and placed before the court. The plaintiffs claimed damages against the defendants and others. The claim was characterised as a conspiracy to injure the plaintiffs by a number of unlawful means, those unlawful means including the giving of false evidence before the court.
Held: The strike out request was refused. The conspiracy had a broader objective and was not brought simply in respect of evidence given. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed.
Waller LJ referred to Lord Morris in Roy v Prior as to its conclusion in relation to witness immunity,and added: ‘It also seems to me that what the above demonstrates is that it is not permissible to divide allegations up as Mr Schaff sought to do into those that involve giving evidence and those which do not.’ and: ‘In my view the statement of Lord Morris is capable of two interpretations, on either of which the plaintiffs, on the pleaded facts, will not be defeated by the witness immunity rule. On the first interpretation his statement should not be read simply as saying that malicious arrest or malicious prosecution alone are exceptions to the witness immunity rule. His statement, in my view, supports a broader proposition that if the action is not brought simply in respect of evidence given or supplied but is brought in relation to some broader objective during the currency of which it may well be that evidence was given witness immunity should not apply.’

Judges:

Waller LJ, Hirst and Aldous LJJ

Citations:

[1999] 2 LLR 616, [1999] EWCA Civ 863, [1999] CLC 801, [1999] 2 Lloyds Rep 611

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRoy v Prior HL 1970
The court considered an alleged tort of maliciously procuring an arrest. The plaintiff had been arrested under a bench warrant issued as a result of evidence given by the defendant. He sued the defendant for damages for malicious arrest.
Held: . .

Cited by:

CitedMahonia Limited v JP Morgan Chase Bankwest Lb Ag QBD 3-Aug-2004
The Claimant claimed on a letter of credit issued by the Defendant on behalf of Enron Ltd, who asserted it was not liable to pay there having been unlawful behaviour by Enron Ltd. Swap agreements had been entered into, and the defendant said the . .
CitedWalsh v Staines and others ChD 26-Jul-2007
The defendants applied to strike out a claim based on an allegation of a fraudulent deceit and conspiracy in earlier proceedings between the parties. It was said that the defendant solicitors had represented that their client had funds to support an . .
CitedTotal Network Sl v Revenue and Customs HL 12-Mar-2008
The House was asked whether an action for unlawful means conspiracy was available against a participant in a missing trader intra-community, or carousel, fraud. The company appealed a finding of liability saying that the VAT Act and Regulations . .
CitedSingh v Moorlands Primary School and Another CA 25-Jul-2013
The claimant was a non-white head teacher, alleging that her school governors and local authority had undermined and had ‘deliberately endorsed a targeted campaign of discrimination, bullying, harassment and victimisation’ against her as an Asian . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Jurisdiction

Updated: 05 December 2022; Ref: scu.145778

LL v The Lord Chancellor: QBD 11 Nov 2015

The claimant sought damages after being wrongfully imprisoned for contempt. The judge imposing the sentence: ‘should have recused herself from hearing the committal application, that the procedure adopted in relation to deciding whether there was a breach of the order of 21 March 2014 was incorrect, that there was insufficient evidence to justify a finding that the Claimant was in deliberate breach of the order and, finally, that the procedure adopted in the sentencing exercise was flawed.’
Held: The claim failed: ‘the bar for establishing a claim for damages in this context is necessarily set at a high level. I do not consider that the circumstances of this case cross the threshold thus established.’

Judges:

Foskett J

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 3273 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other, Contempt of Court

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.555026

Dramatico Entertainment Ltd and Others v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd and Others: ChD 20 Feb 2012

The claimants, music copyright holders, sought an injunction against the defendant Internet Service Providers to require them to restrain access to a file-sharing website (TPB).
Held: The website was infringing the copyright of the claimants.

Judges:

Arnold J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 268 (Ch), [2012] 3 CMLR 14, [2012] RPC 27, [2013] Bus LR D24, [2012] ECDR 14

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 97A, European Parliament and Council Directive 2001/29/EC of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society 8(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedTwentieth Century Fox Film Corp and Others v British Telecommunications Plc ChD 28-Jul-2011
The claimant rights holders sought an order to require the defendant broadband internet provider to deny access to its users to websites which were said to facilitate the distribution of infringing copies of their films. An earlier judgment had . .

Cited by:

Principal judgmentDramatico Entertainment Ltd and Others v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd and Others ChD 2-May-2012
The claimant record companies sought injunctions to prevent the defendant broadband suppliers allowing access to a website which provided facilties to those wishing to swap materials which infringed the claimants’ copyrights in music.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Torts – Other

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.451434

Regina v Board of Visitors of Gartree Prison, Ex parte Sears: 14 Mar 1985

A prisoner sought damages in respect of cellular confinement and loss of privileges.
Held: Mann J. said: ‘If a person is imprisoned in a place where he is lawfully so imprisoned, then it does not seem to me that a variation in conditions of confinement can constitute the tort of false imprisonment at common law.’

Citations:

Times 20-Mar-1985

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedMiddleweek v The Chief Constable of Merseyside (Note) CA 1990
The plaintiff had been awarded damages for false imprisonment by the jury on the basis that his otherwise lawful detention at a police station had been made unlawful because it was unreasonable in the circumstances to keep him in a police cell.
CitedRegina v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison, Ex parte Hague, Weldon v Home Office HL 24-Jul-1991
The prisoner challenged the decision to place him in segregation under Prison Rule 43. Under rule 43(1) the initial power to segregate was given to ‘the governor’. The case arose from the fact that the governor of one prison had purported to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Prisons, Torts – Other

Updated: 04 December 2022; Ref: scu.271100

In re Gomersall: 1867

Bills with a face value of pounds 1,700 were purchased for pounds 200.
Held: Proof that the goods were purchased at a much lower price than the ordinary trade price is not absolute proof of bad faith but is very strong evidence of fraudulent knowledge.

Judges:

Brett J

Citations:

(1875) 1 ChD 137

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedGE Capital Bank Ltd v Rushton and Another CA 14-Dec-2005
The bank had entered into a master trading agreement with a trader under which the trader bought motor vehicles as agent for the bank for resale. The vehicles belonged to the bank. The defendant bought all the trader’s vehicles. The defendant now . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 01 December 2022; Ref: scu.236667

Hoye v Bush: 1841

A constable applied for a warrant for the arrest of Richard Hoye, but the justice mistakenly issued a warrant for the arrest of John Hoye, which was the name of Richard Hoye’s father. The constable arrested Richard Hoye, who sued for false imprisonment, and he was held to be entitled to recover: ‘The question in this case is, whether the defendant was justified in arresting the plaintiff under a warrant, describing him as John Hoye, his real name being Richard Hoye. On the part of the defendant it is contended that the justification was sufficient, inasmuch as an officer is protected, where the party arrested is the person really intended to be taken. Such a qualification is not allowed by law. In civil process you could not justify taking a person by the name mentioned in the warrant, his real name being different.’

Judges:

Tindal CJ

Citations:

(1840 ) 1 Man and G 775

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedCole v Hindson 1795
A policeman could not justify taking a person by the name mentioned in the warrant, his real name being different. The plea averred that Aquila Cole and Richard Cole were the same person. . .
CitedShadgett v Clipson 1807
A sheriff’s officer could not justify an imprisonment of A. B. under a latitat against C. B. though it was averred that A. B. and C. B., are one and the same person, there being no averment that A. B. was known by the name of C. B. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 01 December 2022; Ref: scu.229688