Mengesha v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis: Admn 18 Jun 2013

The claimant was an observer at a demonstration in central London. Along with others she was detained within a police cordon. She was told she would not be released until she allowed herself to be photographed. This was done in an aggressive and intimidating manner. She said that this was involuntary and that it had been unlawful.
Held: The photographs had been obtained unlawfully and must be destroyed. They could not be retained.

Judges:

Moses LJ, Wyn Williams J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 1695 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedAB and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Huddersfield Magistrates’ Court and Another Admn 10-Apr-2014
The claimants challenged the lawfuness of search warrants issued by the respondent court. They were solicitors, and were related to a person suspected of murder who was thought to have fled the country. The officers were looking for evidence that . .
CitedWright v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis QBD 11-Sep-2013
The claimant sought damages for false imprisonment and infringement of his human rights in the manner of the defendant’s management of a demonstration in which he was involved. The issue was whether ilce action was justified on the basis that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Information, Police

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.510923

Al-Jedda, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence: Admn 12 Aug 2005

The claimant was born an Iraqi, but had been granted British Nationality. He was later detained in Iraq suspected of membership of a terrorist group. No charges were brought, and he complained that his article 5 rights were infringed. The defendant argued that UN resolution 1546 requiring it to maintain order in Iraq displaced the claimants rights.
Held: Rights enforceable under the 1998 Act were not greater than those under the Convention. By clause 103 of the UN Treaty, the rights and duties created prevailed over other instruments. His rights under the Convention could be displaced by UN resolution, from which were derived a power of internment. There was no duty to repatriate the claimant.

Judges:

Moses J, Richards J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 1809 (Admin), Times 12-Sep-2005, [2005] HRLR 1355

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 5, Human Rights Act 1998, UN Charter 103

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Lyons, Parnes, Ronson, Saunders HL 15-Nov-2002
The defendants had been convicted on evidence obtained from them by inspectors with statutory powers to require answers on pain of conviction. Subsequently the law changed to find such activity an infringement of a defendant’s human rights.
CitedRoberts v Parole Board HL 7-Jul-2005
Balancing Rights of Prisoner and Society
The appellant had been convicted of the murder of three police officers in 1966. His tariff of thirty years had now long expired. He complained that material put before the Parole Board reviewing has case had not been disclosed to him.
Held: . .
CitedAl Skeini and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence and Another Admn 14-Dec-2004
Several dependants of persons killed in Iraq by British troops claimed damages.
Held: The court considered extensively the scope and applicability of Article 1 duties. In general an English court would have no jurisdiction over deaths abroad . .
CitedIn re McKerr (Northern Ireland) HL 11-Mar-2004
The deceased had been shot by soldiers of the British Army whilst in a car in Northern Ireland. The car was alleged to have ‘run’ a checkpoint. The claimants said the investigation, now 20 years ago, had been inadequate. The claim was brought under . .
CitedRegina on the Application of B and others v Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office CA 18-Oct-2004
The applicant children had been detained in immigration camps in Australia. They escaped and sought refuge in the British High Commission in Melbourne and claimed diplomatic asylum. They claimed in damages after being returned to the authorities in . .
CitedParochial Church Council of the Parish of Aston Cantlow and Wilmcote with Billesley, Warwickshire v Wallbank and another HL 26-Jun-2003
Parish Councils are Hybrid Public Authorities
The owners of glebe land were called upon as lay rectors to contribute to the cost of repairs to the local church. They argued that the claim was unlawful by section 6 of the 1998 Act as an act by a public authority incompatible with a Convention . .
CitedS, Regina (on Application of) v South Yorkshire Police; Regina v Chief Constable of Yorkshire Police ex parte Marper HL 22-Jul-2004
Police Retention of Suspects DNA and Fingerprints
The claimants complained that their fingerprints and DNA records taken on arrest had been retained after discharge before trial, saying the retention of the samples infringed their right to private life.
Held: The parts of DNA used for testing . .
CitedRegina v Special Adjudicator ex parte Ullah; Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 17-Jun-2004
The applicants had had their requests for asylum refused. They complained that if they were removed from the UK, their article 3 rights would be infringed. If they were returned to Pakistan or Vietnam they would be persecuted for their religious . .
CitedGillow v The United Kingdom ECHR 24-Nov-1986
The housing authority in Guernsey refused to allow the applicants to occupy the house they owned there.
Held: The house in question was the applicants’ home because, although they had been absent from Guernsey for many years, they had not . .
CitedQuark Fishing Ltd, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs CA 29-Apr-2004
The claimant sought damages for having had its licence to catch Patagonian toothfish off South Georgia revoked, saying that it had infringed its property rights under the Convention.
Held: Though the Convention rights had been extended to . .
CitedIn Re H and others (Minors) HL 10-Apr-1997
Three young children had been brought to England from Israel by their mother but without the consent of the father, who now sought their return. The mother claimed that the father had subsequently acquiesced in the removal. Both parents were . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromAl-Jedda v Secretary of State for Defence CA 29-Mar-2006
The applicant had dual Iraqi and British nationality. He was detained by British Forces in Iraq under suspicion of terrorism, and interned.
Held: His appeal failed. The UN resolution took priority over the European Convention on Human Rights . .
At first instanceAl-Jedda, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence (JUSTICE intervening) HL 12-Dec-2007
The appellant who had dual Iraqi and British nationality complained of his detention by British troops in Iraq. He was not charged with any offence, but was detained on the ground that his internment is necessary for imperative reasons of security . .
At AdmnAl-Jedda v Secretary of State for the Home Department SIAC 23-May-2008
The appellant had been granted british citizenship. He now appealed against a an order under section 40(2) of the 1981 Act depriving him of his British citizenship on the ground that the respondent was satisfied that deprivation was conducive to the . .
See AlsoAl-Jedda v Secretary of State for the Home Department SIAC 22-Oct-2008
The Court was asked whether or not the procedural protections afforded by Article 6(1) ECHRR as identified by the House of Lords in Secretary of State for the Home Department v MB [2007] UKHL 46 [2008] 1 AC 440 apply to the Appellant’s appeal . .
See AlsoAl-Jedda v The United Kingdom ECHR 2-Mar-2009
The claimant, an Iraqi and British national complained of his arrest and internment on suspicion of terrorist involvement. . .
See AlsoAl-Jedda v Secretary of State for Defence QBD 5-Mar-2009
The claimant, an Iraqi/British national complained of his detention in Iraq by the defendant without any due process. . .
See AlsoAl-Jedda v Secretary of State for the Home Department SIAC 7-Apr-2009
The appellant challenged an order made under the 1981 Act revoking his British citizenship, saying that it infringed his article 8 rights to family life. . .
See AlsoSecretary of State for The Home Department v Al-Jedda SC 9-Oct-2013
The claimant had obtained British citizenship, but had had it removed by the appellant by an order under the 1981 Act after he came to be suspected of terrorist involvement. He had appealed against the order, eventually succeeding on the basis that . .
At Admn (1)Al-Jedda v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 29-Mar-2012
The appellant had been deprived of his British Citizenship by an order of the respondent under the 1981 Act. That had meant that he was unable to return to the UK. He now appealed against refusal of his challenge to the order. . .
At Admn (1)Al-Jedda v United Kingdom ECHR 7-Jul-2011
Grand Chamber – The international measure relied on by the respondent state had to be interpreted in a manner that minimised the extent to which arbitrary detention was sanctioned or required.
The court described its role in settling awards of . .
At Admn (1)Hilal Al-Jedda v Secretary of State for The Home Department SIAC 26-Nov-2010
Deprivation of Citizenship – Substantive – Dismissed . .
At Admn (1)Al-Jedda v Secretary of State for Defence CA 8-Jul-2010
Al Jedda, who had both Iraqi and British nationality, sought damages for unlawful imprisonment by reason of his detention by British forces in a military detention centre in Iraq. . .
At Admn (1)Al-Jedda v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 12-Mar-2010
The claimant appealed against a decision withdrawing his British citizenship, saying that this would leave him stateless. . .
See AlsoAl-Jedda v Secretary of State for The Home Department (Deprivation of Citizenship Directions – Oral Ruling ) SIAC 7-Feb-2014
Order . .
See AlsoHilal Al-Jedda SIAC 18-Jul-2014
lSIAC Deprivation of Citizenship : Preliminary Issue . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Torts – Other

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.229747

Lonhro plc v Fayed: 19 Jul 1988

The plaintiff and defendant competed in bidding for a public company. The plaintiff having been restrained by the Secretary of State, alleged that the defendant had used a fraudulent misrepresentation to achieve this.
Held: It was not a tort to intefere in another’s right to make a takeover bid.

Judges:

Pill J

Citations:

[1988] 3 All ER 464, Independent 19-Jul-1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromLonhro plc v Fayed CA 1990
The parties competed against each other in bidding for a public company. The plaintiff’s bid was referred to the Monopolies Commission, and they undertook to purchase no further shares. The defendant’s bid was not so referred, and the plaintiff . .
First InstanceLonhro plc v Fayed HL 28-Jun-1991
The parties had competed in bidding to acquire a public company. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant had used a fraudulent misrepresentation to the Secretary of State to achieve an advantage.
Held: To establish the tort of conspiracy to . .
Appeal fromLonrho plc v Fayed CA 1989
There had been a battle to purchase the share capital of the House of Fraser which owned Harrods. Lonrho alleged that the Fayed brothers had perpetrated a fraud on the Secretary of State, and thereby secured permission to buy the company without a . .
CitedTotal Network Sl v Customs and Excise Commissioners CA 31-Jan-2007
The defendants suspected a carousel VAT fraud. The defendants appealed a finding that there was a viable cause of action alleging a ‘conspiracy where the unlawful means alleged is a common law offence of cheating the public revenue’. The defendants . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.223004

Lonhro plc v Fayed: CA 1990

The parties competed against each other in bidding for a public company. The plaintiff’s bid was referred to the Monopolies Commission, and they undertook to purchase no further shares. The defendant’s bid was not so referred, and the plaintiff claimed that the defednant had influenced the Secretary of State’s decision by fraudulent misrepresentations, and claimed in damages for wrongful interference in trade. They appealed an order striking out the claim as disclosing no reasonable cause.
Held: In such an action it was necessary to demonstrate that the unlawful act complained of was directed at the plaintiff, and was intended to cause him harm. The precise ambit of the tort remained unsettled, and would be better resolved after the factual circumstances had been established. Appeal allowed.

Citations:

[1990] AC 479

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromLonhro plc v Fayed 19-Jul-1988
The plaintiff and defendant competed in bidding for a public company. The plaintiff having been restrained by the Secretary of State, alleged that the defendant had used a fraudulent misrepresentation to achieve this.
Held: It was not a tort . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromLonhro plc v Fayed HL 28-Jun-1991
The parties had competed in bidding to acquire a public company. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant had used a fraudulent misrepresentation to the Secretary of State to achieve an advantage.
Held: To establish the tort of conspiracy to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.223002

Kuchenmeister v Home Office: QBD 1958

The plaintiff, a German national landed at Heathrow airport en route to Dublin. The immigration officers, instead of refusing him leave to land (as they had been instructed to do), detained him at the airport until it was too late for him to catch the Dublin flight. They might have had other powers to detain him, but had wrongly acted under the 1953 Order which gave no such power.
Held: He had been wrongfully imprisoned. The immigration officers had no power to detain the claimant in such a way as to prevent his transiting from one aircraft to another The right of liberty is a precious right entitled to protection. Barry J said: ‘His liberty was restricted to a greater degree than the immigration authorities were entitled to restrict it under [the particular power they sought to rely upon]. The fact that they might have restricted his mobility by employing the powers conferred upon them by other articles of the Order seems to me to be immaterial. It is no answer, when a man says ‘I have been unlawfully arrested without a warrant,’ to say ‘Well, had I (the person making the arrest) taken the trouble to go and ask for a warrant, I would undoubtedly have got it.’ That would be no answer to a claim for unlawful arrest. Similarly here, although the [immigration officers] could have detained the plaintiff by refusing him leave to land, that does not entitle them to detain him on the grounds on which they did.’
The judge awarded damages of andpound;150 even though ‘no pecuniary damage [had] been suffered’ on the basis that it was ‘a fair figure which will vindicate the plaintiff’s rights without amounting to a vindictive award’.

Judges:

Barry J

Citations:

[1958] 1 QB 496

Statutes:

Aliens Order 1953 2(1)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedLumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 23-Mar-2011
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as . .
CitedBostridge v Oxleas NHS Foundation Trust CA 10-Feb-2015
The claimant had been detained as a mental patient, but it was accepted that that detention had been unlawful as to over 400 days. The respondent argued that since he might have been detained in any event under other powers, he should receive only . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Damages

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.431210

E v News International Ltd and others: QBD 22 Jul 2008

Application by person subject to civil proceeedings order for permission to bring claims for defamation and otherwise against the defendants.
Held: Leave was refused. The claims in relation to the hard copy articles have no real prospect of success and/or were an abuse of the process of the court, and claim in relation to the internet postings would fail for the same reasons, together with the additional reason that there is no evidence of publication.

Judges:

Coulson J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1390 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Supreme Court Act 1981

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Defamation, Torts – Other

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.271043

Young v Kent County Council: QBD 14 Mar 2005

The claimant a child had climbed the wall of a school building and on to the roof to collect a ball. He then fell through a skylight.
Held: Asking whether the state of the premises posed a danger: ‘yes, they did. The roof was an inherently dangerous place for a child, particularly having regard to the brittle nature of the skylight. The state of the premises did pose a risk in the sense that children could fall off or be hurt by going through the skylight.’ It was quite probable that the claimant jumped on the skylight, but the roof was an inherently dangerous place for a child particularly having regard to the brittle nature of the skylight.

Judges:

Morison J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 1342 (QB)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedKeown v Coventry Healthcare NHS Trust CA 2-Feb-2006
The claimant a young boy fell from a fire escape on the defendant’s building. He suffered brain damage and in later life was convicted of sexual offences.
Held: His claim failed: ‘there was no suggestion that the fire escape was fragile or had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.238292

Aerospace Publishing Ltd and Another v Thames Water Utilities Ltd: QBD 13 Jan 2006

Whether respondents liable for damage from leak from mains water pipe – calculation of damages.

Judges:

Holland J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 2987 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Water Industry Act 1991

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromAerospace Publishing Ltd and Another v Thames Water Utilities Ltd CA 11-Jan-2007
A substantial private archive of valuable books had been damaged when the defendant’s water mains burst. The court was asked to assess the value.
Held: The water company’s appeal failed save to a small extent. The articles were of substantial . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Utilities, Torts – Other, Damages

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.238319

G, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 5 Nov 2015

The Claimant sought: (1) a Declaration as to his date of birth, namely that he was born on 10 October 1997; (2) a Declaration that he was unlawfully detained between 21 May and 1 June 2012, alternatively between 28 May and 1 June 2012 and, (3) damages for unlawful imprisonment, alternatively just satisfaction for breach of Article 5 ECHR

Judges:

Michael Kent QC HHJ

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 3185 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Torts – Other

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.554287

Webb v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police: CA 26 Nov 1999

The Police had confiscated money suspected to be the proceeds of drug trafficking, but no offence was proved. The magistrates had refused to return the money under the 1897 Act. The claimants now sought to reciver it under civil proceedings.
Held: The judge was wrong to have found public policy grounds for refusing to order what he had found to be such proceeds. There was no statutory power to hold the money and it must be returned: ‘There is no statutory power to confiscate the proceeds of drug dealing within the United Kingdom where the person entitled to possession of the money is not convicted of a drug trafficking offence. I recognise that there may be circumstances where for a variety of reasons a prosecution may not take place. But that does not, in my view, justify expropriation by means of a defence to a civil claim for return of money which has been seized from persons who are not convicted.’
The position was essentially the same whether proceedings were taken against the police directly or whether proceedings were taken pursuant to 1897 Act. In each of the cases, the police initially lawfully seized the money, but the statutory power to retain it was exhausted. ‘the court should not, in my view, countenance expropriation by a public authority of money or property belonging to an individual for which there is no statutory authority’ and ‘if goods are in the possession of a person, on the face of it he has the right to that possession. His right to possession may be suspended or temporarily divested if the goods are seized by the police under lawful authority. If the police right to retain the goods comes to an end, the right to possession of the person from whom they are seized revives. In the absence of any evidence that anybody else is the true owner, once the police right of retention comes to an end, the person from whom they were compulsorily taken is entitled to possession.’

Judges:

May, Pill, Hale, LJJ

Citations:

Gazette 08-Dec-1999, [2000] QB 427, [1999] EWCA Civ 3041, [2000] 2 WLR 546, [2000] 1 All ER 209

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police (Property) Act 1897 1(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AppliedTinsley v Milligan HL 28-Jun-1993
Two women parties used funds generated by a joint business venture to buy a house in which they lived together. It was vested in the sole name of the plaintiff but on the understanding that they were joint beneficial owners. The purpose of the . .

Cited by:

CitedMorgan, Regina (on the Application of) v Justices of Dyfed Powys Magistrates’ Court Admn 18-Jun-2003
Money had been taken by the Police, but after the applicants had been acquitted, they sought it to be returned. Their action was struck out after long delays. They applied to the Magistrates who turned down the application.
Held: The money . .
FollowedRegina (on the application of Carter) v Ipswich Magistrates’ Court Admn 2002
Mrs Carter had paid a man to murder someone. The man was an undercover police agent. In time Mrs Carter was convicted of soliciting to commit murder, but Mr Carter was acquitted. She disclaimed all interest in the money she had paid in favour of her . .
FollowedCostello v Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary CA 22-Mar-2001
The police seized a car from Mr Costello, believing that it was stolen. The seizure was lawful at the time, by virtue of section 19 of PACE. The police never brought any criminal proceedings against Mr Costello, but they refused to return the car to . .
CitedGough and Another v The Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police CA 2-Mar-2004
The claimants sought return of vehicle parts from the police. The police replied that the goods had been tampered with in such a way as to suggest they may have been stolen, and that they were therefore kept, even after the finish of the court . .
CitedMerseyside Police v Hickman and Another Admn 1-Mar-2006
Cash had been seized by the police under the 1984 Act. It was later seized also under the 2003 Act. The respondent said this was unlawful.
Held: The forfeited money could be seized again under the 2003 Act. The 2002 Act allowed appropriate . .
CitedScopelight Ltd and Others v Chief of Police for Northumbria CA 5-Nov-2009
The claimant sought return of items removed by the defendants under the 1984 Act. A decision had been made against a prosecution by the police. The police wished to hold onto the items to allow a decision from the second defendant.
Held: The . .
CitedO’Leary International Ltd v North Wales Police Admn 31-May-2012
The company employed drivers to cross the UK. They were stopped and did not have the requisite drivers records. Instead they produced certificates as to having had rest days. These proved false, and the drivers said that the had been produced for . .
CitedMerseyside Police v Owens Admn 31-May-2012
The police had refused to returns items seized from Mr Owens on the basis that to do so would indirectly encourage and assist him in suspected criminal activity. CCTV footage had been removed from him to attempt identify an arsonist of a house.The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Police

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.90348

Atwood v Monger: 1658

Atwood brought an action upon the case against Monger, for causing a false presentment to be made against him before the Conservators of the River of Thames, for suffering 8 loads of earth to fall into the river of Thames, and obteins a verdict ;
the defendant moved in arrest of judgement, that it dh not appear by the record what authority the conservators had to take the presentment, and if they had no authority, then it was coram non judice, and the plaintiff could not be prejudiced by it. Twisden answered it is well enough, though their authority appears not by the record, because they have authority given them by the statute of 13 R. 2. c. 9. Which is a general law, and ought to be taken notice of; but if not, yet the action is well brought, for it is brought for the vexation the plaintiff was put unto by reason of the presentment, and the other matter alleged, is but by way of inducement to the action, 2 Car. in Dent and Olifes case in this Court so held, and though the conservators had no authority, yet the action lies for the rnalitious prosecution, and for unjustly vexing him, and so adjudged. Trin. 16 Car. in this Court in Damon and Sheremans case. Hales on the other side said, that this Court is not bound to take notice, that the Lord Maior of London hath this jurisdiction of conservatorship, for the statute which gave it him is a particular law touching him only, and so not to be taken notice of without it be shewn, and then if he have no such authority, all the proceedings against the plaintiff are void. Roll Chief Iustice, An action upon the case lies for bringing an appeal against one iri the Common Pleas, though it be coram non judice, by reason of the vexation of the party, and so it is all one whether here were any jurisdiction or no, for the plaintiff is prejudiced by the vexation, and the conservators took upon them to have authority to take the presentment. And I hold that an action upon the case will lye, for maliciously bringing an action agairist him where he had no probable cause, and if such actions were used to be brought, it would deter men from such malitious courses as are to often put in practice.

Citations:

[1658] EngR 37, (1658) Sty 378, (1658) 82 ER 793 (A)

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedWillers v Joyce and Another (Re: Gubay (Deceased) No 1) SC 20-Jul-2016
Parties had been involved in an action for wrongful trading. This was not persisted with but the claimant sought damages saying that the action was only part of a campaign to do him harm. This appeal raised the question whether the tort of malicious . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.410828

Triebner v Soddy: 1837

A person who obtains goods on contract, not having the means nor the intention of paying for them, is a competent witness in an action of trover by the person of whom he obtained them, to recover possession of them from a person to whom he parted with them at a less price than he had engaged to pay for them.

Citations:

[1837] EngR 323, (1837) 7 Car and P 718, (1837) 173 ER 314

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Torts – Other

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.313440

Waterer v Freeman: 1792

The court considered whether the double execution on goods for a debt was a tort.

Citations:

[1792] EngR 2758, (1792) Hob 266, (1792) 80 ER 412 (C)

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedWillers v Joyce and Another (Re: Gubay (Deceased) No 1) SC 20-Jul-2016
Parties had been involved in an action for wrongful trading. This was not persisted with but the claimant sought damages saying that the action was only part of a campaign to do him harm. This appeal raised the question whether the tort of malicious . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.360970

Lonhro plc v Fayed: HL 28 Jun 1991

The parties had competed in bidding to acquire a public company. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant had used a fraudulent misrepresentation to the Secretary of State to achieve an advantage.
Held: To establish the tort of conspiracy to injure, it was sufficient that the conspirators intentionally caused injury to the plaintiff, and that they had used unlawful means to do so. It was not a defence to show that their predominant purpose was to protect their own interests.

Citations:

[1990] AC 479, Guardian 28-Jun-1991, [1991] 3 All ER 303

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

First InstanceLonhro plc v Fayed 19-Jul-1988
The plaintiff and defendant competed in bidding for a public company. The plaintiff having been restrained by the Secretary of State, alleged that the defendant had used a fraudulent misrepresentation to achieve this.
Held: It was not a tort . .
Appeal fromLonhro plc v Fayed CA 1990
The parties competed against each other in bidding for a public company. The plaintiff’s bid was referred to the Monopolies Commission, and they undertook to purchase no further shares. The defendant’s bid was not so referred, and the plaintiff . .

Cited by:

CitedOBG Ltd OBG (Plant and Transport Hire) Ltd v Raymond International Ltd; OBG Ltd v Allen CA 9-Feb-2005
The defendants had wrongfully appointed receivers of the claimant, who then came into the business and terminated contracts undertaken by the business. The claimant asserted that their actions amounted to a wrongful interference in their contracts . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Company

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.223003

Britton v Royal Insurance Company: 1865

The insured made a claim under his insurance policy for twice the amount he had actually lost. It was an express condition of the insurance policy that a fraudulent part of a claim would avoid the balance of the claim.
Held: The duty of good faith in insurance contracts is a continuing one.
Willes J said: ‘A fire insurance, he said, is a contract of indemnity; that is, it is a contract to indemnify the assured against the consequences of a fire, provided it is not wilful. Of course, if the assured set fire to his house, he could not recover. That is clear. But it is not less clear that, even supposing it were not wilful, yet as it is a contract of indemnity only, that is, a contract to recoup the insured the value of the property destroyed by fire, if the claim is fraudulent, it is defeated altogether. That is, suppose the insured made a claim for twice the amount insured and lost, thus seeking to put the office off its guard, and in the result to recover more than he is entitled to, that would be a wilful fraud, and the consequence is that he could not recover anything. This is a defence quite different from that of wilful arson. It gives the go-bye to the origin of the fire, and it amounts to this – that the assured took advantage of the fire to make a fraudulent claim. The law upon such a case is in accordance with justice, and also with sound policy. The law is, that a person who had made such a fraudulent claim could not be permitted to recover at all. The contract of insurance is one of perfect good faith on both sides, and it is most important that such good faith should be maintained. It is the common practice to insert in fire-policies conditions that they shall be void in the event of a fraudulent claim; and there was such a condition in the present case. Such a condition is only in accordance with legal principle and sound policy. It would be most dangerous to permit parties to practise such frauds, and then, notwithstanding their falsehood and fraud, to recover the real value of the goods consumed. And if there is wilful falsehood and fraud in the claim, the insured forfeits all claim whatever upon the policy.’

Judges:

Willes J

Citations:

[1865] EngR 66, (1865) 4 F and F 905, (1865) 176 ER 843

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedGalloway v Guardian Royal Exchange (UK) Limited CA 15-Oct-1997
The claimant’s policy had been declared void ab initio by the court. On the application form he had falsely stated that he had no convictions, but had only shortly before been convicted of obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception. Part of the . .
CitedPorter v Zurich Insurance Company QBD 5-Mar-2009
The claimant insured his house with the defendants. Severely depressed, drunk and delusional, he set fire to it and now claimed after refusal to pay out. He said that he was not acting as a free agent.
Held: A claimant who seeks to recover . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Insurance, Torts – Other

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.214223

Hussein v Choung Fook Kam: HL 1970

When making an arrest, the standard of proof required of the officer is suspicion and no more. It falls well short of prima facie proof. Suspicion should not be elided with guilt, or even prima facie proof of guilt. It ‘is a state of conjecture or surmise where proof is lacking: I suspect but I cannot prove.’

Judges:

Lord Devlin

Citations:

[1970] AC 942

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: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.182927

Margaret Ribee v Michael Norrie: CA 22 Nov 2000

An owner of a property let to tenants was liable to a neighbour injured after a fire in the property, where the fire arose in circumstances which the owner had power, through the making of rules to prevent. The damage arose from a tenant smoking in a communal area. The test was whether the owner had the right to debar such behaviour. Since he did, he must be treated as the occupier of the land for this purpose and was therefore liable to the neighbour.

Citations:

Times 22-Nov-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 275, [2001] L and TR 23

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedLMS International Ltd and others v Styrene Packaging and Insulation Ltd and others TCC 30-Sep-2005
The claimants sought damages after their premises were destroyed when a fire started in the defendants neighbouring premises which contained substantial volumes of styrofoam. They alleged this was an unnatural use of the land.
Held: To . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Land, Personal Injury

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.88772

Regina v Colohan: CACD 17 May 2001

The defendant appealed against his convictions for harassment. He said that since he suffered from schizophrenia, the test for whether his actions had been reasonable should be relaxed.
Held: The test of whether actions constituted harassment under the Act was an objective one – would a reasonable person think it amounted to harassment? Accordingly the mental condition of the defendant was irrelevant. The mental illness of a defendant was no defence. There was no need to apply to the hypothetical reasonable person the characteristics of the defendant.
Kennedy LJ said:
‘Mr. Butterfield’s principal short submission on behalf of the appellant is that in order to apply this test the hypothetical reasonable person referred to in section 1(2) must be endowed with the relevant characteristics of the accused and in particular with any recognisable mental disorder to which he is subject. In the present case the consequence of the submission, if correct, is that the appellant is to be judged by the standards of the hypothetical reasonable schizophrenic.
Mr. Butterfield’s associated secondary submission is that the jury ought to have been directed that it was open to them when considering the defence provided by subsection (1)(3)(c) to say that the appellant’s conduct was, in the particular circumstances of his illness, a reasonable one. Any construction other than that, say Mr. Butterfield, is simply unfair to an accused with a recognizable mental illness.
The question raised by these submissions is one of the proper construction of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. As the first word of that title suggests, this is an Act whose purpose is significantly protective and preventative. The long title is ‘An Act to make provision for protecting persons from harassment and similar conduct.’
As well as making a course of conduct amounting to harassment an offence, the Act by section 3 provides civil remedies by way of damages for a breach of section 1 and by way of injunction to restrain an apprehended breach of it. Further, section 5 enables a criminal court, before whom a defendant has been convicted under section 2, to make a restraining order prohibiting him from doing anything specified. Such a restraining order is to be made for the purpose of protecting from harassment not only the victim of the offence but also any other person specified. As is well-known the Act was passed with the phenomenon of ‘stalking’ particularly, although not exclusively, in mind. The conduct at which the Act is aimed, and from which it seeks to provide protection, is particularly likely to be conduct pursued by those of obsessive or otherwise unusual psychological make-up and very frequently by those suffering from an identifiable mental illness. Schizophrenia is only one such condition which is obviously very likely to give rise to conduct of this sort.
We are satisfied that to give the Act the construction for which Mr. Butterfield contends would be to remove from its protection a very large number of victims and indeed to run the risk of significantly thwarting the purpose of the Act. If such a construction is correct it would prevent the conduct in question from being a breach of section 1 and thus exclude not only suitable punishment for the perpetrator, but also damages, and, more especially, an injunction or restraining order for the protection of the victim. We do not believe that Parliament can have meant the provisions in question to have the meaning fro which Mr. Butterfield contends. Moreover, as it seems to us, if Mr. Butterfield’s submissions were correct then subsection 1(2) would have been inserted unnecessarily into the Act.
We agree accordingly with the learned judge that except in so far as it requires the jury to consider the information actually in the possession of this defendant section 1(2) requires the jury to answer the question whether he ought to have known that what he was doing amounts to harassment by the objective test of what a reasonable person would think. Its words, we are satisfied, are abundantly clear.
As to section 1(3)(c) that, we are satisfied, poses even more clearly an objective test, namely whether the conduct is in the judgment of the jury reasonable. There is no warrant for attaching the word ‘reasonable’ or via the words ‘particular circumstances’ the standards or characteristics of the defendant himself.

Judges:

Kennedy LJ VP, Curtis, Hughes JJ

Citations:

Times 14-Jun-2001

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Protection from Harassment Act 1997 1(2), 1(3)(c)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHayes v Willoughby CA 13-Dec-2011
Harassment Occurs on the Result, not the Intention
The claimant said that over several years, the respondent had pursued him in many ways challenging his management of a company’s affairs. Complaints had been investigated by the insolvency service and by the police who had discovered nothing to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Torts – Other

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.88418

Regina v Chief Constable for Warwickshire and Others Ex Parte Fitzpatrick and Others: QBD 1 Oct 1997

Judicial Review is not the appropriate way to challenge the excessive nature of a search warrant issues by magistrates. A private law remedy is better. Jowitt J said: ‘Judicial review is not a fact finding exercise and it is an extremely unsatisfactory tool by which to determine, in any but the clearest of cases, whether there has been a seizure of material not permitted by a search warrant. In my judgment a person who complains of excessive seizure in breach of section 16(8) should not, save in such cases, seek his remedy by way of judicial review but should rely on his private law remedy when he will have a tribunal which will be able to hear evidence and make findings of fact unfettered by Wednesbury principles. In an appropriate case the court in a private law action is able to grant interlocutory relief on a speedy basis on well recognised principles so that in all but the clearest cases of a breach of section 16(8) judicial review has only disadvantages and no advantages when compared with the private law remedy.’
Any breach of section 15 or 16 renders the search and seizures unlawful.

Judges:

Rose LJ, Jowitt LJ

Citations:

Times 26-Nov-1997, [1997] EWHC Admin 820, [1999] 1 WLR 564, [1998] 1 All ER 65, [1998] Crim LR 290

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 15 16(8)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedReynolds v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis 1985
A search warrant had been obtained under the 1913 Act. The court considered the existence of a tort of obtaining a search warrant maliciously.
Waller LJ discussed the problem facing police officers when a large volume of material were to be . .
Not PreferredRegina v Longman QBD 1988
Lord Lane CJ expressed reservations as to the construction of this provision: whether the consequence of a breach of section 15 or section 16 or both would render a search of premises under a warrant unlawful and he expressed the tentative view, . .
CitedRegina v Central Criminal Court ex parte A J D Holdings Ltd CACD 14-Feb-1992
Nolan LJ said that the phrase used in section 15(6)(b), ‘so far as is practicable,’ is imprecise and that it may well be impossible to draw a clear line between what is and what is not practicable. . .
PreferredRegina v Chief Constable of the Lancashire Constabulary ex parte Parker Admn 2-Jan-1993
There was a two paged document headed ‘warrant to enter and search premises’ which set out all the information required by section 15(6)(a). It did not, however, on its face identify the articles or persons to be sought in subparagraph (b). That . .

Cited by:

CitedFaisaltex Ltd and Others v Lancashire Constabulary and Another QBD 24-Jul-2009
The claimants wished to claim damages saying that in executing a search warrant, the defendant had made excessive seizures of material. The claimants sought inspection by independent counsel of the materials seized to establish this in a manner . .
CitedBhatti and Others v Croydon Magistrates’ Court and Others Admn 3-Feb-2010
The claimant challenged the valiity of search warrants used at his home. He said they were deficient in not including the information as required by the Act. The police said that they were in accordance with the Home Office guidance.
Held: . .
CitedSher and Others v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police and Others Admn 21-Jul-2010
The claimants, Pakistani students in the UK on student visas, had been arrested and held by the defendants under the 2000 Act before being released 13 days later without charge. They were at first held incognito. They said that their arrest and . .
CitedFitzpatrick and Others v The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis QBD 11-Jan-2012
The claimants, two solicitors and their employer firm sought damages alleging trespass and malicious procurement by police officers in obtaining and executing search warrants against the firm in 2007 when they were investigating suspected offences . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other, Judicial Review

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.86351

Lonhro Plc and Others v Fayed and Others (No 5): CA 6 Oct 1993

The plaintiff sought to amend a conspiracy claim, based on arrangements to publish defamatory statements, by adding a claim for damage to reputation and feelings.
Held: Such a claim could not be made in conspiracy. A Plaintiff’s motives in commencing proceedings, as to whether they constituted an abuse of process, are only assessable by the judge at trial, and not on an interlocutory application. The action was re-instated. ‘[N]o one has a right to a reputation which is unmerited. Accordingly one can only suffer an injury to reputation if what is said is false. In defamation the falsity of the libel or slander is presumed; but justification is a complete defence.’
Dillon LJ said: ‘In my judgment, if the plaintiffs want to claim damages for injury to reputation or injury to feelings, they must do so in an action for defamation, not in this very different form of action. Injury to reputation and to feelings is, with very limited exceptions, a field of its own and the established principles in that field are not to be side-stepped by alleging a different cause of action. Justification, truth, is an absolute defence to an action for defamation and it would, in my judgment, be lamentable if a plaintiff could recover damages against defendants who had combined to tell the truth about the plaintiff and so had destroyed his unwarranted reputation. But that would be the consequence if damages for injury to reputation and injury to feelings could be claimed in a ‘lawful means’ conspiracy action. To tell the truth would be wrongful. I see no difference in this regard between general reputation and commercial or business reputation.’

Judges:

Stuart-Smith, Dillon LJ

Citations:

Gazette 06-Oct-1993, Gazette 29-Sep-1993, [1993] 1 WLR 1489

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedFoaminol Laboratories Ltd v British Artide Plastics Ltd 1941
There is no justification for artificially excising from the damages recoverable for breach of contract that part of the financial loss which might or might not be the subject of a successful claim in defamation. A claim for mere loss of reputation . .

Cited by:

CitedGreene v Associated Newspapers Ltd CA 5-Nov-2004
The claimant appealed against refusal of an order restraining publication by the respondent of an article about her. She said that it was based upon an email falsely attributed to her.
Held: ‘in an action for defamation a court will not impose . .
CitedAshley and Another v Sussex Police CA 27-Jul-2006
The deceased was shot by police officers raiding his flat in 1998. The claimants sought damages for his estate. They had succeeded in claiming damages for false imprisonment, but now appealed dismissal of their claim for damages for assault and . .
CitedHannon and Another v News Group Newspapers Ltd and Another ChD 16-May-2014
The claimants alleged infringement of their privacy, saying that the defendant newspaper had purchased private information from police officers emplyed by the second defendant, and published them. The defendants now applied for the claims to be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Defamation, Torts – Other

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.83189

Hough v Chief Constable of Staffordshire Police: CA 14 Feb 2001

Where a constable arrested someone based upon information on the police national computer, he was not to be held accountable for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment, if the information upon which that had in turn been based, did not justify the suspicion. The issue was whether the constable acted reasonably in relying upon that information. The entry itself was reasonable and objective cause for his suspicion, and arrest of the claimant. If information received from a member of the public could be an appropriate basis for an arrest, why should that same information cease to be such a basis when transformed into an entry on the computer.
The chief constable appealed against a finding of false imprisonment and assault, saying the claimant had been arrested properly. He was a passenger in a car which was mistakenly listed as ‘of interest’.
Held: The chief constable’s appeal succeeded. The critical question to be asked in all cases is what is in the mind of the arresting officer: he can never be a ‘mere conduit’ for someone else. It is for that reason insufficient for an arresting officer to rely solely upon an instruction to carry out the arrest. Conversely, however, where the arresting officer’s suspicion is formed on the basis of a police national computer entry, that entry is likely to provide the necessary objective justification. If information from an informer or member of the public can properly found suspicion sufficient for an arrest, why too should not an apparently responsible entry in the computer?

Judges:

Simon Brown LJ VP, Longmore J

Citations:

Times 14-Feb-2001, Gazette 05-Apr-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 39

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedO’Hara v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary HL 21-Nov-1996
Second Hand Knowledge Supports Resaobnable Belief
The plaintiff had been arrested on the basis of the 1984 Act. The officer had no particular knowledge of the plaintiff’s involvement, relying on a briefing which led to the arrest.
Held: A reasonable suspicion upon which an arrest was founded . .
CitedFox, Campbell and Hartley v The United Kingdom ECHR 30-Aug-1990
The court considered the required basis for a reasonable suspicion to found an arrest without a warrant: ‘The ‘reasonableness’ of the suspicion on which an arrest must be based forms an essential part of the safeguard against arbitrary arrest and . .

Cited by:

CitedArmstrong v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police CA 5-Dec-2008
The Chief Constable appealed against a finding that the claimant had been arrested for rape without reasonable grounds. A description of the rapist had been given which the claimant met in several respects, but from which he clearly differed in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Police

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.81482

Haystead v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 2 Jun 2000

The defendant had hit a mother in the face as she held the child. The force was sufficient to cause her to drop the child causing injury to the child. He appealed against a conviction for beating the child.
Held: The appeal failed. A battery could be inflicted even though the force actually used was used only indirectly. There was no difference in principle between the use of a weapon to hit the child, and causing the injury through the mother. The only difference here was as to the presence of recklessness rather than intent.

Judges:

Laws LJ, Silber J

Citations:

Times 02-Jun-2000, [2000] EWHC QB 181, [2000] COD 288, (2000) 164 JP 396, [2000] 2 Cr App Rep 339, [2000] Crim LR 758, [2000] 3 All ER 890

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 39

Citing:

CitedRegina v Cunningham CCA 1957
Specific Intention as to Damage Caused
(Court of Criminal Appeal) The defendant wrenched a gas meter from the wall to steal it. Gas escaped. He was charged with unlawfully and maliciously causing a noxious thing, namely coal gas, to be taken by the victim.
Held: Byrne J said: ‘We . .
CitedRegina v Burstow, Regina v Ireland HL 24-Jul-1997
The defendant was accused of assault occasioning actual bodily harm when he had made silent phone calls which were taken as threatening.
Held: An assault might consist of the making of a silent telephone call in circumstances where it causes . .
CitedRegina v Martin CCCR 1881
r_martin CCCCR
The defendant was accused of unlawful conduct in causing panic at a theatre (by turning off the lights and barring the doors) in the course of which a number of people were injured by trampling as they stampeded down a stairway. His conduct was . .
CitedRegina v Salisbury 9-Oct-1972
Australia – Victoria The court considered the nature of the act required to found an allegation of assault: ‘It may be that the somewhat different wording of section 20 of the English Act has played a part in bringing about the existence of the two . .
CitedRegina v Wilson (Clarence); Regina v Jenkins HL 1983
The court considered the application of the section on alternative verdicts available to juries on a trial for attempted murder. The allegations in a charge under section 20 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 or under section 9(1)(b) of the . .
CitedScott v Shepherd 1773
Squib Thrower’s Liability through Negligence
An accusation of assault and trespass will lie where the defendant threw a squib which was then thrown about by others in self defence, but eventually exploded putting out the plaintiff’s eye. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Torts – Other

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.81287

Darby v National Trust: CA 29 Jan 2001

The claimant’s husband drowned swimming in a pond on the National Trust estate at Hardwick Hall. Miss Rebecca Kirkwood, the Water and Leisure Safety Consultant to the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, gave uncontradicted evidence, which the judge accepted, that the pond was unsuitable for swimming because it was deep in the middle and the edges were uneven. She said The National Trust should have made it clear that swimming in the pond was not allowed and taken steps to enforce the prohibition.
Held: It was for the court to set the standard, not the witness. The risk from drowning in a small pond is obvious, and no warning should be required. Where there is a special risk, of catching Weill’s disease from swimming in a stretch of water, and a notice would have prevented the deceased swimming, the owner’s negligence in not erecting a warning sign is irrelevant where this was not in fact a cause of the death.

Citations:

Times 23-Feb-2001, [2001] PIQR 372, [2001] EWCA Civ 189

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedTomlinson v Congleton Borough Council and others HL 31-Jul-2003
The claimant dived into a lake, severely injuring himself. The council appealed liability, arguing that it owed him no duty of care under the Act since he was a trespasser. It had placed warning signs to deter swimmers.
Held: The council’s . .
CitedHampstead Heath Winter Swimming Club and Another v Corporation of London and Another Admn 26-Apr-2005
Swimmers sought to be able to swim unsupervised in an open pond. The authority which owned the pond on Hampstead Heath wished to refuse permission fearing liability for any injury.
Held: It has always been a principle of the interpretation of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Negligence

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.79804

Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Cresta Holidays Ltd and Others: ChD 5 Apr 2001

Travel operators sold insurance on behalf of insurance companies who paid on Insurance Premium Tax. The level of tax was raised, but the increase was later found to be unlawful state aid. The operators sought a refund of the tax overpaid from the Commissioners. Such a claim could be made only under one of two provisions. One related to claims before payment, and the second to restitution. Since the claimants had not themselves paid the tax, there was no restitution, and the claim failed.

Citations:

Gazette 05-Apr-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 215

Links:

Bailii

Insurance, Torts – Other, Customs and Excise

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.79376

Bennett v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: Admn 24 Oct 1997

Police and prosecuting authority have no inherent immunity from suit for tort of misfeasance in public office if the breach is properly made out. Immunity extends to statements made or agreed to be made out of court ‘if these were clearly and directly made in relation to the proceedings in court, for example, witnesses’ proofs of evidence.’

Judges:

Sir Richard Scott VC

Citations:

Times 24-Oct-1997, (1997) 10 Admin LR 245

Cited by:

CitedDarker v Chief Constable of The West Midlands Police HL 1-Aug-2000
The plaintiffs had been indicted on counts alleging conspiracy to import drugs and conspiracy to forge traveller’s cheques. During the criminal trial it emerged that there had been such inadequate disclosure by the police that the proceedings were . .
CitedTaylor and Others v Director of The Serious Fraud Office and Others HL 29-Oct-1998
The defendant had requested the Isle of Man authorities to investigate the part if any taken by the plaintiff in a major fraud. No charges were brought against the plaintiff, but the documents showing suspicion came to be disclosed in the later . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78337

Balchin v Chief Constable of Hampshire Constabulary: CA 4 May 2001

The case was being heard before a civil jury. The parties had agreed a description of the facts, and prepared an agreed list of issues where there remained factual disputes. The judge had gone beyond those lists, and acted as if she was trying the case, rather than the jury. She embarked upon a fact-finding exercise of her own, and made factual findings adverse to the police. She should not have done so, but rather summed up for the jury. If she needed findings of fact in order to be able to give rulings, then she should have put those to the jury for their decision.

Citations:

Times 04-May-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 538

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78098

Jalloh, Regina (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: SC 12 Feb 2020

The claimant alleged that a curfew imposed upon him was unlawful.

Judges:

Lady Hale, Lord Kerr, Lord Carnwath, Lord Briggs, Lord Sales

Citations:

[2020] 2 WLR 41

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At Admin (1)Jollah, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 24-Feb-2017
Judicial review of refusal to lift curfew conditions . .
At Admin (2)Jollah, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department (No 2) Admn 9-Nov-2017
Claim for damages for false imprisonment arising out of the imposition of what has been referred to as a curfew, namely a requirement that the claimant be present for a certain number of hours each day at specified premises after release from . .
Appeal fromJollah, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 12-Jun-2018
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.647454

O v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 3 Apr 2012

The claimant sought judicial review of the Secretary of State’s continued detention pending deportation of her after her diagnosis with a medical condition.
Held: Lang J refused her permission to apply for judicial review. She had to decide: ‘whether the circumstances had changed such that the detention had become arguably unlawful under either Hardial Singh principles, as submitted, or because of an arguable failure on the part of the Secretary State properly to apply her policy on the mentally ill.’

Judges:

Lang J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 2899 (Admin)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

At AdmnO, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 27-Apr-2016
The appellant failed asylum seeker had been detained for three years pending deportation. She suffered a mental illness, and during her detention the medical advice that her condition could be coped with in the detention centre changed, recommending . .
At AdmnOgunbiyi, Regina (on The Application of) v Southend County Court and Another Admn 19-Mar-2015
Application for judicial review of a decision of a Circuit Judge at the County Court, (a) refusing permission to appeal again the judgment of a Deputy District Judge following a trial of the claim for damages again the claimant under a hire purchase . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.616743

Farrer v Beswick: 1836

Baron Parke said: ‘I have always understood, until the doubt was raised in Barton v. Williams, that one joint-tenant or tenant in common of a chattel could not be guilty of a conversion by a sale of that chattel, unless it were sold in such a manner as to deprive his partner of his interest in it. A sale in market overt would have that effect.’

Judges:

Baron Parke

Citations:

1836 Meeson and Welsby’s Reports 682

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Bonner and Others CACD 24-Feb-1970
The appellants challenged their convictions for theft, saying that as partners in a firm they could not be convicted of theft of partnership property.
Held: The appeals were allowed for the unsatisfactory and unsafe nature of the convictions . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.566424

Bents Brewery and Co Ltd v Hogan: 1945

The employer complained that the defendant had disclosed details of the plaintiffs’ weekly sales and total wages’ bill.
Held: These were confidential. In order to prove that the tort of unlawful interference with contractual relations was committed, it would be necessary to prove that the plaintiffs suffered sime damage.
An employee owes a duty to his employer not to disclose confidential information gained through the employment. This can be implied without explicit assertion in the contract.

Citations:

[1945] 2 All ER 570

Employment, Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.537577

Lane v Capsey: 1891

A building society held a charge over property which enjoyed a right of way over neighbouring land. The right was obstructed by the neighbour building over it. Their request for the removal of the obstruction had been rejected by the court with no costs or damages being awarded. The neighbours property was held in receivership. The Society now sought a declaration that they were entitled to the remedy of self help to abate the obstruction.
Held: The earlier failure did not mean that any right of abatement or other remedy had also been lost.

Judges:

Chitty J

Citations:

[1891] 3 Ch 411, (1891) 61 LJ Ch 55, (1891) 65 LT 375, (1891) 40 WR 87

Cited by:

CitedLagan Navigation Co v Lambeg Bleaching, Dyeing and Finishing Co Ltd HL 1927
Lord Atkinson stated: ‘It has been well said that the abatement of a nuisance is a remedy which the law does not favour and is not usually advisable, and that its exercise destroys any right of action in respect of the nuisance.’
Concluding, . .
CitedChamberlain v Lindon Admn 18-Mar-1998
The appellant challenged the dismissal of his private prosecution of the defendant in destroying a new garden wall. The magistrates had found a lawful excuse in that the defendant said that the wall had been constructed to obstruct his private right . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.541708

The Walter D Wallet: 1893

The vessel was arrested by a defendant who had been, but no longer was, a part owner of the vessel, having forgotten or forgotten the importance of that fact.
Held: Procuring the wrongful arrest of a ship can found a cause of action similar to malicious prosecution.
Sir Francis H. Jeune P said ‘In the present case, I think that actual damage there was none. I doubt if, as was urged before me, the ship could have been arrested, when she was, by any proper process, though perhaps an injunction to prevent leaving port until the stipulated policies were given, and the stipulated sums paid, could have been obtained. But she was not detained in port by the arrest, nor was her loading interfered with. Still, the action of the defendants was, I think, clearly, in common law phrase, without reasonable or probable cause; in common law phrase, without reasonable or probable cause; or, in equivalent Admiralty language, the result of crassa negligentia, and in a sufficient sense mala fides, and the plaintiffs’ ship was in fact seized. Therefore, I think the plaintiffs must be supposed to have suffered some damage, and I fix that damage at 11.’

Judges:

Sir Francis H. Jeune P

Citations:

[1893] P 202

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedCrawford Adjusters and Others v Sagicor General Insurance (Cayman) Ltd and Another PC 13-Jun-2013
(Cayman Islands) A hurricane had damaged property insured by the respondent company. The company employed the appellant as loss adjustor, but came to suspect advance payments recommended by him, and eventually claimed damages for deceit and . .
CitedCrawford v Jenkins CA 24-Jul-2014
The parties had divorced but acrimony continued. H now complained of his arrests after allegations from his former wife that he had breached two orders. He had been released and no charges followed. The court had ruled that W’s complaints were . .
CitedWillers v Joyce and Another (Re: Gubay (Deceased) No 1) SC 20-Jul-2016
Parties had been involved in an action for wrongful trading. This was not persisted with but the claimant sought damages saying that the action was only part of a campaign to do him harm. This appeal raised the question whether the tort of malicious . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Transport

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.536419

Beaulieu v Finglam: 1401

Markham J considered the possibility of liability for the escape of fire to damage a neighbour’s property and said: ‘A man is held to answer for the act of his servant or of his guest in such a case; for if my servant or my guest puts a candle by a wall and the candle falls into the straw and burns all my house and the house of my neighbour also, in this case I shall answer to my neighbour for his damage . . I shall answer to my neighbour for each person who enters my house by my leave or my knowledge, or is my guest through me or through my servant, if he does any act, as with a candle or aught else, whereby my neighbour’s house is burnt. But if a man from outside my house and against my will starts a fire in the thatch of my house or elsewhere, whereby my house is burned and my neighbours’ houses are burned as well, for this I shall not be held bound to them; for this cannot be said to be done by wrong on my part, but is against my will.’

Citations:

(1401) B and M 557

Cited by:

CitedStannard (T/A Wyvern Tyres) v Gore CA 4-Oct-2012
The defendant, now appellant, ran a business involving the storage of tyres. The claimant neighbour’s own business next door was severely damaged in a fire of the tyres escaping onto his property. The court had found him liable in strict liability . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.512019

Case LXXI 29 Ass Pl 47 6 E 4, 9 7 H 4, 41 30 Ass Pl 20: 1220

Outlawry is a good plea in an audita querela, for the outlawry does not depend upon the audita querela ; and the judgment against which relief is prayed, is not to be reversed, but only the execution of it. In error, outlawry upon the judgment which is to be reversed by the writ of error, is not a plea,; for the said judgment being the foundation of the outlawry, the reversal of it reverses the outlawry: but a writ of error, to reverse any other judgment thn that upon which the outlawry depends, outlawry is a good plea. ‘Tis so of an attaint, where the attaint is to annul the verdict ; and by consequence, the judgment upon which the outlawry depends, doth not disable the plaintiff in the said attaint ; for the foundation is to be taken away, and therefore the outlawry in this case is no plea.
Judged by both benches.
If a writ of error be brought to reverse an outlawry in any action, outlawry in another action shall not disable the plaintiff in error; for otherwise, if the outlawry was erroneous, it shall never be reversed.
Exceptio rei cujus dissolutio petitur, nulla est.

Citations:

[1220] EngR 373, (1220-1623) Jenk 37, (1220) 145 ER 28 (A)

Links:

Commonlii

Torts – Other, Litigation Practice

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.461285

Case LXII, 2 Cr 545, S C Hob 38, 233 1 Sid, 98, 249 17 Jac Hob 272, Lancaster v Sidley: 1220

An action of trover and conversion was brought in the King’s Bench ; after verdict for the plaintiff; he had judgment ; affirmed in error ; although neither the bill nor bail was entered : for he may be in custodia mareschalli, notwithstanding; and the want of a bill is aided by 18 El. cap. 14, for it is an original; and to be in custodia mareaschalli os only a fiction ; it is sufficient to declare that the defendant is in custodia mareschalli. This judgment was affirmed in the Exchequer chamber and both the records sent into the King’s Bench.

Citations:

[1220] EngR 234, (1220-1623) Jenk 900, (1220) 145 ER 218 (E)

Links:

Commonlii

Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.461146

Case XXII 10 Jac 10 Co 115 B, 117 B, Pitfold’s Case Damages, Count: 1220

In trespass the plaintiff declares to 40l damages ; upon not guilty pleaded by the defendant, a verdict gives 49l damages with costs of suit to the plaintiff ; the plaintiff releases 9l. Of the damages, and has judgment for the 40l. damages, with the costs. Damages are for the wrong done before the writ purchased. Costs are pro expensis litis.

Citations:

[1220] EngR 57, (1220-1623) Jenk 288, (1220) 145 ER 208 (B)

Links:

Commonlii

Torts – Other, Costs

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.460969

CASE XXXVIII 2 H 7, 8 By The Judges of Both Benches Forms, Precedents: 1220

Upon a venire facias upon an issue joined, the sheriff returns 12 jurors only according to the words of the writ; where he ought to have returned 24 according to constant usage, for speeding: the trial in case of challenge, death, sickness, or delay of the tales ; the sheriff shall be amerced for this return. So in a praecipe quod reddat, if he returns that the tenant has restored the land to the demandant . So in debt, that the defendant has paid the debt to the plaintiff. So on a distringas jurutores, that distrinxit illos per omnes exitus; without mentioning how much upon every one. All these are bad returns ; and the sheriff shall be amerced for such returns. So upon an habeas corpora against the jurors, that he has attacthed the jurors,without saying and habeo corpora, and.

Citations:

[1220] EngR 268, (1220-1623) Jenk 172, (1220) 145 ER 112 (E)

Links:

Commonlii

Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.461180

Morley v Loughnan: 1893

Wright J in the context of this claim for undue influence, relied on a passage from an earlier case in which Wilmot CJ had said, ‘Let the hand receiving [a gift] be ever so chaste, yet, if it comes through a polluted channel, the obligation of restitution will follow it’.

Judges:

Wright J

Citations:

[1893] Ch 736

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedSoutzos v Asombang and Others ChD 21-Jun-2011
The claimant had obtained a freezing order against the defendants. His claim having been dismissed, the court now considered if and what damages should be paid under the cross-undertaking he had given.
Held: Setting out and applying the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Undue Influence

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.441144

Winkworth v Christie, Manson and Woods Ltd: ChD 1980

The right to sue in conversion at common law is available to a person who is entitled at the time of the conversion to the immediate possession of the goods.
Slade J discussed the applicability of the law of renvoi in an international dispute about the ownership of goods.

Judges:

Slade J

Citations:

[1980] Ch 496

Cited by:

CitedIran v Berend QBD 1-Feb-2007
The Republic of Iran sought the return of a fragment of ancient Achaemenid relief in the possession of the defendant, saying that it was part of an ancient monument. The defendant said that she had bought it properly at an auction in Paris. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.442756

Clissold v Cratchley: CA 1910

A solicitor had sued out a Writ of fi.fa on an order in favour of his client, unaware that the debt had been paid at the country office of the solicitor, prior to the writ being issued.
Held: An action in tort will be available for setting in train execution against property without reasonable cause and maliciously: ‘But common sense, wholly apart from authority, tells one that, when the total amount has been paid which is ordered by a judgment to be paid, the judgment ought no longer to be of any force or effect’. There being no existing judgment, the writ of execution was void ab initio.

Judges:

Vaughan Williams, Fletcher Moulton, Farwell LJJ

Citations:

[1910] 2 KB 244

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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 . .
CitedCrawford Adjusters and Others v Sagicor General Insurance (Cayman) Ltd and Another PC 13-Jun-2013
(Cayman Islands) A hurricane had damaged property insured by the respondent company. The company employed the appellant as loss adjustor, but came to suspect advance payments recommended by him, and eventually claimed damages for deceit and . .
CitedCrawford v Jenkins CA 24-Jul-2014
The parties had divorced but acrimony continued. H now complained of his arrests after allegations from his former wife that he had breached two orders. He had been released and no charges followed. The court had ruled that W’s complaints were . .
CitedWillers v Joyce and Another (Re: Gubay (Deceased) No 1) SC 20-Jul-2016
Parties had been involved in an action for wrongful trading. This was not persisted with but the claimant sought damages saying that the action was only part of a campaign to do him harm. This appeal raised the question whether the tort of malicious . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.428023

Bulwer’s Case: 1572

B. brought an action on the case in the county of N. for maliciously causing him to be outlawed in London upon process sued out of a Court at Westminster, and causing him to be imprisoned in N. upon a capias iutlagutum directed to the sheriff of that county, but issued at Westminster; and upon demurrer it was adjudged that the action was well brought in the county of N.
In all cases where the action is founded on two things done in several counties, and both are material or traversable, and the one without the other does not maintain the action, the plaintiff may bring his actiori in which county he will.

Citations:

[1572] EngR 58, (1572-1616) 7 Co Rep 1, (1572) 77 ER 411

Links:

Commonlii

Torts – Other, Litigation Practice

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.432025

Plange v Chief Constable for Humberside Police: CA 23 Mar 1992

Where an arresting officer knows at the time of arrest that no charge is possible, the arresting officer acts unlawfully. However, it is for the claimant to establish on Wednesbury principles that the decision to arrest in any particular case was unlawful for want of proper exercise of discretion. Parker LJ said that ‘it will only be in very exceptional cases that the condition precedent [in section 24(6) reasonable grounds to suspect] being satisfied, a Wednesbury challenge can succeed’.

Judges:

Parker LJ

Citations:

Times 23-Mar-1992, [1992] 156 LG Rev 1024, (1992) TLR 137

Cited by:

CitedRichardson v The Chief Constable of West Midlands Police QBD 29-Mar-2011
The claimant, a teacher, said he had been unlawfully arrested and detained after an allegation of assault from a pupil. Having attended the police station voluntarily, he said that the circumstances did not satisfy the required precondition that an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.431558

Piggott v Canning: 1660

The defendant pleads a decree, and that the plaintiff was purchaser pendente lite, and the defendant was ordered to answer, saving the benefit of his plea. Note : The bill was there exhibited, to be relieved against the said decree, (1) Piggot being a purchaser without notice of Canning’s suit or trust, and said the decree was gotten by fraud.

Citations:

[1660] EngR 199, (1660-1706) 2 Freem Chy 149, (1660) 22 ER 1121 (B)

Links:

Commonlii

Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.410189

Bromage and Another v Prosser: 20 Aug 1824

Semble, that malice is necessary to ground an action for words ; and that if words be proved to be spoken bona fide and without malice, no action lies for the speaking of them, though they be false and actionable in themselves; and though injury result to the party from the speaking of them – and, semble, that the defendant may, under the general issue, go into evidence to shew that he spoke the words bona fide and without rnalice

Citations:

[1824] EngR 822, (1824) 1 Car and P 475, (1824) 171 ER 1280

Links:

Commonlii

Cited by:

See AlsoBromage And Another v Prosser 1825
Bayley J distinguished ‘malice in law’, inferred from the defendant’s intentional interference with the plaintiff’s rights, from ‘malice in fact’ and Malice in common acceptation of the term means ill-will against a person, but in its legal sense it . .
See AlsoBromage And Another v Prosser 2-Jun-1825
Thls case having been again argued, by J L Adolphus, for the plaintiffs, and Campbell, for the defendants, the Court now gave Judgment on the motion for a new trial.
Abbot CJ (after stating the nature of the case) — On the general question, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.327813

Sturge v Starr: 15 Feb 1833

A man, already married, performed the ceremony of marriage with GW, and joined with her in executiing an assignment of her life interest in a trust fund to a purchaser. The fraud practised upon GW by the person acting in the character of her husband did not affect the validity of the assignment, nor was it necessary to make the supposed husband a party to a suit instituted by the purchaser to obtain the benefit of the assignment

Citations:

[1833] EngR 414, (1833) 2 My and K 195, (1833) 39 ER 918

Links:

Commonlii

Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.318408

Bromage And Another v Prosser: 1825

Bayley J distinguished ‘malice in law’, inferred from the defendant’s intentional interference with the plaintiff’s rights, from ‘malice in fact’ and Malice in common acceptation of the term means ill-will against a person, but in its legal sense it means a wrongful act done intentionally without just cause or excuse.’

Citations:

[1825] EngR 42, (1825) 4 B and C 247, (1825) 107 ER 1051

Links:

Commonlii

Citing:

See AlsoBromage and Another v Prosser 20-Aug-1824
Semble, that malice is necessary to ground an action for words ; and that if words be proved to be spoken bona fide and without malice, no action lies for the speaking of them, though they be false and actionable in themselves; and though injury . .

Cited by:

See AlsoBromage And Another v Prosser 2-Jun-1825
Thls case having been again argued, by J L Adolphus, for the plaintiffs, and Campbell, for the defendants, the Court now gave Judgment on the motion for a new trial.
Abbot CJ (after stating the nature of the case) — On the general question, . .
CitedRhodes v OPO and Another SC 20-May-2015
The mother sought to prevent a father from publishing a book about her child’s life. It was to contain passages she said may cause psychological harm to the 12 year old son. Mother and son lived in the USA and the family court here had no . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.326133

Staley v Long: 8 May 1837

Trespass qu. cl. fr. Pleas. 1. Not guilty. 2. Not Plaintiff’s close. 3. Right of way. Verdict for Plaintiff on 1 and 2, with 1s. damages, and for Defendant on 3. The Court ordered the postea to be delivered to the Defendant.

Citations:

[1837] EngR 729, (1837) 3 Bing NC 781, (1837) 132 ER 612 (A)

Links:

Commonlii

Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.313846

Green v The London General Omnibus Company (Limited): 18 Nov 1859

A corporation aggregate may be liable to an action for intentional acts of misfeasance by its servants, provided they are sufficiently connected with the scope and object of its incorporation. Therefore, in an action against a company established for conveying passengers by omnibuses in the streets of London, charging that the company by its servants wrongfully, vexatiously, and maliciously did certain acts (describing them) with a view to, and which in the result did, obstruct and annoy the plaintiff’ in the conduct of a similar trade :- Held, that, as the acts complained of were connected with the object and purpose for which the company was incorporated the company was responsible.

Citations:

[1859] EngR 999, (1859) 7 CB NS 290, (1859) 144 ER 828

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other, Company

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.288351

Gilding v Eyre And Another: CCP 8 Jul 1861

After getting judgment against the plaintiff for a debt, and substantial repayment of it by him, the defendant issued a writ of execution for the full amount of the debt, in consequence of which the plaintiff was arrested by the sheriff’s officers. The plaintiff brought proceedings to recover the amount which he had over-paid on the basis of malicious arrest.
Held: The defendant’s argument that the claim was not sustainable because the original proceedings had not terminated in the plaintiff’s favour was rejected. The court distinguished cases of malicious prosecution, emphasising that the proceedings had, subject to execution, actually terminated, and that the defendant ‘by means of a regular writ of execution extorted money which he knew had already been paid and was no longer due on the judgment.’

Judges:

Williams, Byles and Keating JJ

Citations:

[1861] EngR 793, (1861) 10 CB NS 592, (1861) 142 ER 584

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedLand Securities Plc and Others v Fladgate Fielder (A Firm) CA 18-Dec-2009
The claimants wanted planning permission to redevelop land. The defendant firm of solicitors, their tenants, had challenged the planning permission. The claimants alleged that that opposition was a tortious abuse because its true purpose was to . .
CitedCrawford Adjusters and Others v Sagicor General Insurance (Cayman) Ltd and Another PC 13-Jun-2013
(Cayman Islands) A hurricane had damaged property insured by the respondent company. The company employed the appellant as loss adjustor, but came to suspect advance payments recommended by him, and eventually claimed damages for deceit and . .
CitedCrawford v Jenkins CA 24-Jul-2014
The parties had divorced but acrimony continued. H now complained of his arrests after allegations from his former wife that he had breached two orders. He had been released and no charges followed. The court had ruled that W’s complaints were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.284554

Marrinan v Vibert: CA 2 Jan 1963

A tortious conspiracy was alleged in the conduct of a civil action. The plaintiff appealed against rejection of his claim.
Held: The appeal failed as an attempt to circumvent the immunity of a wirness in defamation by framing a claim in conspiracy. Sellers LJ considered whether a complaint was privileged: ‘Whatever form of action is sought to be derived from what was said or done in the course of judicial proceedings must suffer the same fate of being barred by the rule which protects witnesses in their evidence given before the court and in the preparation of the evidence which is to be so given.’
Sellers LJ said: ‘It has been sought in this case to draw a difference between the action of libel and slander, the action of defamation, and that which is set up in this case, one of conspiracy. I can see no difference in the principles of the matter at all. Whatever form of action is sought to be derived from what was said or done in the course of judicial proceedings must suffer the same fate of being barred by the rule which protects witnesses in their evidence before the court and in the preparation of the evidence which is to be so given.’

Judges:

Sellers LJ

Citations:

[1963] 1 QB 528

Citing:

Appeal fromMarrinan v Vibert QBD 1963
The plaintiff brought an action claiming damages for conspiracy against two police officers alleging they had conspired together to make false statements defamatory of him as a barrister.
Held: The claim was struck out. Even a conspiracy to . .
ApprovedCabassi v Vila 12-Dec-1940
High Court of Australia – The claim sought to sidestep the rule giving immuity to witnesses before a court by alleging a conspiracy to give false evidence.
Held: Starke J said: ‘But it does not matter whether the action is framed as an action . .

Cited by:

CitedWestcott v Westcott CA 15-Jul-2008
The defendant was the claimant’s daughter in law. In the course of a bitter divorce she made allegations to the police which were investigated but did not lead to a prosecution. The claimant appealed dismissal of his claim for defamation on the . .
CitedSilcott v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis CA 24-May-1996
The claimant had been convicted of the murder of PC Blakelock. The only substantial evidence was in the form of the notes of interview he said were fabricated by senior officers. His eventual appeal on this basis was not resisted. He now appealed . .
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, Defamation

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.270827

Johnson v Emerson: 1871

Cleasby B recognised that the tort of malicious prosecution could be committed in the malicious presentation of a winding up petition. The effect of presentation of such a petition was immediately damaging to the company which was the subject of the petition.

Judges:

Cleasby, B

Citations:

(1871) Law Rep 6 Ex 329, (1871) LR 6 Ex 329

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedGregory v Portsmouth City Council CA 5-Nov-1997
The plaintiff councillor had been disciplined by the defendant for allegations. The findings were later overturned, and he now sought damages alleging malicious prosecution.
Held: The categories of malicious prosecution are closed, and it was . .
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 . .
CitedCrawford Adjusters and Others v Sagicor General Insurance (Cayman) Ltd and Another PC 13-Jun-2013
(Cayman Islands) A hurricane had damaged property insured by the respondent company. The company employed the appellant as loss adjustor, but came to suspect advance payments recommended by him, and eventually claimed damages for deceit and . .
CitedCrawford v Jenkins CA 24-Jul-2014
The parties had divorced but acrimony continued. H now complained of his arrests after allegations from his former wife that he had breached two orders. He had been released and no charges followed. The court had ruled that W’s complaints were . .
CitedWillers v Joyce and Another (Re: Gubay (Deceased) No 1) SC 20-Jul-2016
Parties had been involved in an action for wrongful trading. This was not persisted with but the claimant sought damages saying that the action was only part of a campaign to do him harm. This appeal raised the question whether the tort of malicious . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Insolvency

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.267523

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Goldblatt: 1972

In a winding up case, the Commissioners can if necessary proceed against a receiver for misfeasance.

Citations:

[1972] Ch 498

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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

Taxes Management, Insolvency, Torts – Other

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.268780

Regina v Carroll and Al-Hasan and Secretary of State for Home Department: Admn 16 Feb 2001

The claimants challenged the instruction that they must squat whilst undergoing a strip search in prison. A dog search had given cause to supect the presence of explosives in the wing, and the officers understood that such explosives might be hidden anally.
Held: The common thread in all the cases has been the search to find whether an objective need for the intrusion or interference with prisoners has been made out. ‘the questions and issues in relation to security and the management of prisons as presented by the Secretary of State cannot be regarded as irrational or incapable of providing substantial objective justification for squat searches without a prisoner being informed of the substance of the reason for the search.’ It is appropriate to accord to the Secretary of State a measure of deference in balancing circumstances and in determining what is required.

Judges:

Newman J

Citations:

[2001] EWHC Admin 110

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedHinds and other v The Queen; Director of Public Prosecutions v Jackson, attorney General of Jamaica (Intervenor) PC 1-Dec-1975
The Gun Court Act 1974 of Jamaica established special courts at different levels to deal with varieties of crimes involving guns. There was provision for hearings to be held in camera. Certain offences carried mandatory life sentences reviewable . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms HL 8-Jul-1999
Ban on Prisoners talking to Journalists unlawful
The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without . .
CitedLindley v Rutter CA 1981
The defendant had been taken into police custody upon arrest for disorderly behaviour. Police officers, acting in accordance with what they believed to be standing orders to search every female prisoner, in the face of a refusal by the defendant to . .
CitedRaymond v Honey HL 4-Mar-1981
The defendant prison governor had intercepted a prisoner’s letter to the Crown Office for the purpose of raising proceedings to have the governor committed for an alleged contempt of court.
Held: The governor was in contempt of court. Subject . .
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 . .
CitedMcFeeley and others v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-May-1980
(Commission) The claimants had been convicted of terrorist-type offences in Northern Ireland and were serving prisoners in HMP The Maze. They protested at a change of regime imposed in 1976, resulting in them not being permitted association with the . .
CitedRe Baker and other Applicants QBNI 1992
The court considered the meaning of the Prisons Rules, and the ability of a governor to order searches of prisoners: ‘the power conferred by Rule 9(1) is intended to be an unqualified power, and the governor is entitled to order a prisoner to be . .
CitedWeatherall v Canada 1988
(Canada) One of the limitations on a prisoner’s rights arising out of his conviction and imprisonment was his subjection to searches necessary for the security and good order of the prison: ‘Nevertheless, such searches should be subject to some . .
CitedSoenen v Director of Edmonton Remand Centre 1983
(Canada) A remand prisoner complained about rectal searches: ‘The applicant’s third complaint is that sometimes members of the Detention Centre staff, who were searching for such things as forks, knives, or other objects, require the inmates who are . .
CitedRegina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Kebilene and others HL 28-Oct-1999
(Orse Kebeline) The DPP’s appeal succeeded. A decision by the DPP to authorise a prosecution could not be judicially reviewed unless dishonesty, bad faith, or some other exceptional circumstance could be shown. A suggestion that the offence for . .
CitedRegina v Gough (Robert) HL 1993
The defendant had been convicted of robbery. He appealed, saying that a member of the jury was a neighbour to his brother, and there was therefore a risk of bias. This was of particular significance as the defendant was charged with conspiracy with . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Mahmood CA 8-Dec-2000
A Pakistani citizen entered the UK illegally and claimed asylum. A week before his claim was refused and he was served with removal directions, he married a British citizen of Pakistani origin. Two children were later born.
Held: Only . .
CitedRegina v Liverpool City Justices ex parte Topping 1983
When the Applicant appeared before the Justices, his solicitor submitted that the Justices should acknowledge that they were aware that in addition to the matter which they were about to try (that is to say an offence of criminal damage against a . .
CitedRegina v Board of Visitors ex parte Lewis 1986
. .
CitedRegina v The Board of Visitors of HMP The Maze ex parte Hone and McCartan 1988
The question whether a prisoner or young offender is entitled to legal representation at an internal prison adjudication is one for the discretion of the relevant authority. . .
CitedRegina v Home Secretary, Ex parte Tarrant and Others 1985
An application for an oral hearing by the prisoner had been made on a special basis. The court set out six considerations of the conditions under which a prisoner facing internal disciplinary proceedings should be given access to legal . .
CitedIn Re Medicaments and Related Classes of Goods (No 2); Director General of Fair Trading v Proprietary Association of Great Britain and Proprietary Articles Trade Association CA 21-Dec-2000
The claimants alleged that a connection between a member of the Restrictive Practices Court, who was to hear a complaint and another company, disclosed bias against them. She had not recused herself.
Held: When asking whether material . .
CitedRegina v HM Prison Service ex parte Hibbert Admn 16-Jan-1997
The general contention that the governor, being part of the prison administration and privy to the decision, could not conduct an adjudication within th eprison was not ‘something outside the normal situation, which could justify intervention in . .
CitedRegina v Chief Constable of the Thames Valley Police, Ex parte Cotton CA 1990
The Chief Constable’s power to dispense with a probationer’s services under Condition 7 is only exercisable in cases where the probationer constable’s unfitness does not arise from alleged misconduct, for example where it arises from the constable’s . .
CitedRegina v The Joint Committee on Surgical Training ex parte Milner Admn 4-May-1994
The court rejected the applicant’s complaint about the non-disclosure of his tutors’ reports upon his surgical abilities on the footing that he ‘has not demonstrated that the evidence on which the [advisory committee] relied is amenable to any . .
CitedPakelli v Germany ECHR 25-Apr-1983
A person charged with a criminal offence who does not wish to defend himself in person, must be able to have recourse to legal assistance of his own choosing. . .
CitedCampbell and Fell v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-Jun-1984
Campbell and others had been involved in conduct within the prison leading to charges against them of mutiny and of striking an officer with a broom handle. The nature of the conduct in question was plainly susceptible of giving rise to criminal . .
CitedEngel And Others v The Netherlands (1) ECHR 8-Jun-1976
The court was asked whether proceedings in a military court against soldiers for disciplinary offences involved criminal charges within the meaning of Article 6(1): ‘In this connection, it is first necessary to know whether the provision(s) defining . .
CitedRegina v Board of Visitors of Hull Prison, Ex parte St Germain (No 2) CA 1979
Proper Limits on Imprisonment
The court discussed the proper limits of imprisonment: ‘despite the deprivation of his general liberty, a prisoner remains invested with residuary rights appertaining to the nature and conduct of his incarceration . . An essential characteristic of . .
CitedO’Reilly v Mackman HL 1982
Remission of Sentence is a Privilege not a Right
The plaintiffs had begun their action, to challenge their loss of remission as prisoners, by means of a writ, rather than by an action for judicial review, and so had sidestepped the requirement for the action to be brought within strict time . .
CitedOzturk v Germany ECHR 21-Feb-1984
A minor infringement may be the subject of a criminal charge: ‘If the Contracting States were able at their discretion, by classifying an offence as ‘regulatory’ instead of criminal, to exclude the operation of the fundamental clauses of Articles 6 . .
Appealed toRegina v Carroll and Al-Hasan and Secretary of State for Home Department CA 19-Jul-2001
Two appellants were prisoners at a high security prison. A search involved the prisoner squatting so that items which might be hidden in their genital or anal areas could be seen. The appellants refused to squat. Both were charged with refusing to . .
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 . .

Cited by:

Appeal FromRegina v Carroll and Al-Hasan and Secretary of State for Home Department CA 19-Jul-2001
Two appellants were prisoners at a high security prison. A search involved the prisoner squatting so that items which might be hidden in their genital or anal areas could be seen. The appellants refused to squat. Both were charged with refusing to . .
First InstanceAl-Hasan, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Feb-2005
Prisoners were disciplined after refusing to be squat searched, saying that the procedure was humiliating and that there were no reasonable grounds to suspect them of any offence against prison discipline. The officer who had been involved in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Prisons, Torts – Other

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.140278

Aldridge v Edwards: CA 16 Mar 2000

The claimant said she had been falsely imprisoned by the defendant taxi driver.
A stay prevented a party from moving forward in proceedings, but did not stop time running for all purposes, including under CCR Ord 7 rule 20 which was a self contained code for extending the period of validity of a summons.

Citations:

Times 28-Mar-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 78

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

County Court Rules 1981 Order 7 Rule 20

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Torts – Other

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.77713

Rex v Ford: 1817

It is not necessary for a person making an arrest to state the charge to the person detained in technical or precise language.

Citations:

(1817) R and R 329

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: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.259577

Gruppo Torras v Al Sabah: ChD 24 Jun 1999

Liability based on knowing receipt did not ‘depend on the commission of any wrong or give rise to any obligation to make good any loss other than by way of restitution.’

Judges:

Mance J

Citations:

Unreported, 24 June 1999

Cited by:

CitedCharter Plc and Another v City Index Ltd and others ChD 12-Oct-2006
An employee of the claimant had fraudulently spent several million pounds of the claimant’s money on personal bets through the defendant company. The claimant said that the defendants knew the origin of the funds and were liable to repay them. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.247621

Thomas v NUM: 1986

Threats made by pickets to miners going in to work were not an assault because the pickets had no capacity to put into effect their threats of violence whilst they were held back from the vehicles carrying the workers.

Judges:

Scott J

Citations:

[1986] 1 WLR 20

Cited by:

CitedMbasogo, President of the State of Equatorial Guinea and Another v Logo Ltd and others CA 23-Oct-2006
Foreign Public Law Not Enforceable Here
The claimant alleged a conspiracy by the defendants for his overthrow by means of a private coup d’etat. The defendants denied that the court had jurisdiction. The claimants appealed dismissal of their claim to damages.
Held: The claims were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.245579

Kingdom of Spain v Christie, Manson and Woods Ltd: 1986

The court questioned the basis of the cause of action asserted in Austria -v- Day.

Judges:

Sir Nicolas Browne-Wilkinson VC

Citations:

[1986] 1 WLR 1120

Citing:

CitedEmperor of Austria v Day and Kossuth 1861
The defendants had printed banknotes in London. Kossuth intended to use the notes in Hungary after overthrowing the Emperor of Austria by revolution. The Emperor obtained an injunction restraining the defendants from continuing to manufacture them. . .

Cited by:

CitedMbasogo, President of the State of Equatorial Guinea and Another v Logo Ltd and others CA 23-Oct-2006
Foreign Public Law Not Enforceable Here
The claimant alleged a conspiracy by the defendants for his overthrow by means of a private coup d’etat. The defendants denied that the court had jurisdiction. The claimants appealed dismissal of their claim to damages.
Held: The claims were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.245565

McGlennan v McKinnon: 1998

Citations:

1998 SLT 494

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

CitedMajrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust HL 12-Jul-2006
Employer can be liable for Managers Harassment
The claimant employee sought damages, saying that he had been bullied by his manager and that bullying amounting to harassment under the 1997 Act. The employer now appealed a finding that it was responsible for a tort committed by a manager, saying . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.243291

McGuire v Kidston: ScSf 2002

Citations:

2002 SLT (Sh Ct) 66

Statutes:

Protection from Harassment Act 1997

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

CitedMajrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust HL 12-Jul-2006
Employer can be liable for Managers Harassment
The claimant employee sought damages, saying that he had been bullied by his manager and that bullying amounting to harassment under the 1997 Act. The employer now appealed a finding that it was responsible for a tort committed by a manager, saying . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.243290

Farrington 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 abuse of his office, and he thereby causes damage to another person, then an action in tort for misfeasance in a public office will lie against him at the suit of that person’.

Judges:

Smith J

Citations:

[1959] VR 286

Cited by:

ApprovedTampion v Anderson 1973
(Full Court of Victoria) . .
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.

Commonwealth, Torts – Other

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.239999

Roncarelli v Duplessis: 1959

(Canada) The court discussed what was ‘targeted malice’ in the context of misfeasance.

Citations:

[1959] SCR 121

Cited by:

CitedOdhavji Estate v Woodhouse 2003
(Supreme Court of Canada) The court reviewed the ingredients of misfeasance in public office.
Held: Iacobucci J said: ‘To summarize, I am of the opinion that the tort of misfeasance in a public office is an intentional tort whose . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Torts – Other

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.240008

Lowery v Walker: CA 1910

An occupier of land who knows that members of the public are in the habit of going on to his land and does nothing to prevent it, may be deemed to have licensed them to do so.

Citations:

[1910] 1 KB 173

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromLowery v Walker HL 9-Nov-1910
A trespasser was injured by the land owner’s savage horse.
Held: If a land-owner knows of but does nothing to stop acts of trespass by the public on his land, there may be an implied license. Decision reversed. In Scottish courts the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.218728

Lemmon v Webb: CA 1894

A neighbour could lop boughs overhanging his property without notice to the owner of the tree, provided that he could do so without entering the owner’s land. A similar right of abatement by cutting applied to encroaching roots.
Lindley LJ said: ‘But to plant a tree on one’s own land infringes no rights, and, if the tree grows over the soil of another, I cannot discover that any action lies for the encroachment unless damage can be proved. I can find no authority for the proposition that an action of trespass would lie in such a case.’
Kay LJ said: ‘The encroachment of the boughs and roots over and within the land of the adjoining owner is not a trespass or occupation of that land which by lapse of time could become a right. It is a nuisance. For any damage occasioned by this an action on the case would lie. Also, the person whose land is so affected may abate the nuisance if the owner of the tree after notice neglects to do so.’

Judges:

Lindley, Lopes and Kay LJJ

Citations:

[1894] 3 Ch 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromLemmon v Webb HL 27-Nov-1894
A land-owner was free to lop off boughs from his neighbours trees to the extent that they reached over his land, and he could lop them without going on to the neighbour’s land. He was not required to give notice of his intention to do so. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Torts – Other

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.219081

Allsop v Allsop: 25 Apr 1860

Complaint was made of illness allegedly caused by a slanderous imputation of unchastity to a married woman. The woman heard the slander at third hand. It was held that the woman could not claim special damages for her illness in an action for slander against the originator of the slander.
Held: Wright J took a narrow view of the case as an authority on the type of damages recoverable in an action for slander. He said that to adopt it as a rule of general application that illness resulting from a false statement could never give rise to a claim for damages would be difficult or impossible to defend.
Martin B said: ‘The law is jealous of actions for mere words, and the rules limiting these actions ought to be adhered to here’

Judges:

Martin B

Citations:

(1860) 29 LJ (Ex) 315, [1860] EngR 661, (1860) 5 H and N 534, (1860) 157 ER 1292

Links:

Commonlii

Cited by:

CitedJones v Jones HL 1916
The House described the different origins of libel and slander. Libel was regarded by the Court of Star Chamber not merely as a crime punishable as such, but also as a wrong carrying the penalty of general damages, and this remedy was carried . .
ApprovedLynch v Knight HL 17-Jul-1861
Lord Wensleydale said: ‘Mental pain or anxiety the law cannot value, and does not pretend to redress, when the unlawful act complained of causes that alone; though where material damage occurs, and is connected with it, it is impossible a jury, in . .
CitedRhodes v OPO and Another SC 20-May-2015
The mother sought to prevent a father from publishing a book about her child’s life. It was to contain passages she said may cause psychological harm to the 12 year old son. Mother and son lived in the USA and the family court here had no . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.199938

Harrop v Hirst: 1868

The inhabitants of a named district, Tamewater, in the parish of Saddleworth, claimed a right to take water from a spout in the highway The claim was for diverting water.
Held: The right was upheld. An action for diverting water is maintainable without proof of any actual personal damage, inasmuch as the act of the defendant might, if repeated often enough without interruption, furnish evidence in derogation of the plaintiff’s legal rights. If you have an infringement of a legal right there is a right of action without actual damage being proved.

Citations:

(1868) LR 4 Ex 43

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedNicholas v Ely Beet Sugar Factory Ltd CA 1936
The plaintiff owned several fisheries and sought damages after the defendant polluted the riner. He was unable to prove any actual loss.
Held: Disturbance of a several fishery was an invasion of a legal right, and in such a case the injury to . .
CitedNetwork Rail Infrastructure Ltd v Williams and Another CA 3-Jul-2018
Japanese Knotweed escape is nuisance
The defendant appealed against an order as to its liability in private nuisance for the escape of Japanese Knotweed from its land onto the land of the claimant neighbours. No physical damage to properties had yet been shown, but the reduction in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Land

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.199942

Nicholas v Ely Beet Sugar Factory Ltd: CA 1936

The plaintiff owned several fisheries and sought damages after the defendant polluted the riner. He was unable to prove any actual loss.
Held: Disturbance of a several fishery was an invasion of a legal right, and in such a case the injury to the legal right carried with it the right to damages. The plaintiff had an incorporeal hereditament in the fishery and also property in the fish found in the fishery. Commenting on Fitzgerald -v- Firbank: ‘That therefore defines the right, and it also defines the cause of action which follows from an infringement of that right. It is not, I think, material to decide whether the proper description of that cause of action is trespass, or trespass on the case or nuisance, forms of action which are now abolished. If it were described as ‘nuisance’ the word ‘nuisance’ would be used in that connection as meaning a private nuisance, one which involved an interference with a private right, so that, as I shall explain in a moment, an action would lie for that interference.’

Judges:

Lord Wright MR

Citations:

[1936] 1 Ch 346

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

ExplainedFitzgerald v Firbank 1897
The owner of a right of fishing asserted a cause of action without proof of special damage against someone who had polluted the river in which the right was exercised.
Held: A right of fishing was of such a nature that a person who enjoyed it . .
CitedHarrop v Hirst 1868
The inhabitants of a named district, Tamewater, in the parish of Saddleworth, claimed a right to take water from a spout in the highway The claim was for diverting water.
Held: The right was upheld. An action for diverting water is . .

Cited by:

CitedWatkins v Secretary of State for The Home Departmentand others CA 20-Jul-2004
The claimant complained that prison officers had abused the system of reading his solicitor’s correspondence whilst he was in prison. The defendant argued that there was no proof of damage.
Held: Proof of damage was not necessary in the tort . .
CitedNetwork Rail Infrastructure Ltd v Williams and Another CA 3-Jul-2018
Japanese Knotweed escape is nuisance
The defendant appealed against an order as to its liability in private nuisance for the escape of Japanese Knotweed from its land onto the land of the claimant neighbours. No physical damage to properties had yet been shown, but the reduction in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.199941

Castorina v Chief Constable of Surrey: CA 10 Jun 1988

Whether an officer had reasonable cause to arrest somebody without a warrant depended upon an objective assessment of the information available to him, and not upon his subjective beliefs. The court had three questions to ask (per Woolf LJ): ‘(a) Did the arresting officer suspect that the person arrested was guilty of the offence? The answer to this question depends entirely on the findings of fact as to the officer’s state of mind. (b) Assuming the officer had the necessary suspicion, was there reasonable cause for suspicion? This is a purely objective requirement to be determined by the judge if necessary on the facts found by a jury. (c) If the answer to the two previous questions is in the affirmative, then the officer has a discretion which entitles him to make an arrest and in relation to that discretion has been exercised in accordance with the principles laid down [in Wednesbury]’
Lawton LJ said: ‘Suspicion by itself, however, will not justify an arrest. There must be a factual basis for it of a kind which the court would adjudge to be reasonable. The facts may be within the arresting constable’s own knowledge or have been reported to him. When there is an issue in a trial as to whether a constable had a reasonable cause, his claim to have had knowledge or to have received reports on which he relied may be challenged. It is within this context that there may be evidential issue as what he believed to be the facts. But it would be for the court to adjudge what were the facts which made him suspect that the person he arrested was guilty of the offence which he was investigating.’

Judges:

Woolf LJ, Sir Frederick Lawton

Citations:

[1988] NLJR 180, Times 15-Jun-1988, [1996] LG Rev Rep 241, [1996] LGR 241

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 24(6)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedAssociated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation CA 10-Nov-1947
Administrative Discretion to be Used Reasonably
The applicant challenged the manner of decision making as to the conditions which had been attached to its licence to open the cinema on Sundays. It had not been allowed to admit children under 15 years of age. The statute provided no appeal . .

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 . .
CitedCumming and others v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police CA 17-Dec-2003
The six claimants sought damages for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment. Each had been arrested on an officer’s suspicion. They operated CCTV equipment, and it appeared that tapes showing the commission of an offence had been tampered with. Each . .
CitedO’Hara v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary HL 21-Nov-1996
Second Hand Knowledge Supports Resaobnable Belief
The plaintiff had been arrested on the basis of the 1984 Act. The officer had no particular knowledge of the plaintiff’s involvement, relying on a briefing which led to the arrest.
Held: A reasonable suspicion upon which an arrest was founded . .
CitedAl-Fayed and others v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and others CA 25-Nov-2004
The appellants appealed from dismissal of their claims for wrongful imprisonment by the respondent. Each had attended at a police station for interview on allegations of theft. They had been arrested and held pending interview and then released. Mr . .
CitedAustin and Saxby v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis QBD 23-Mar-2005
Towards the end of a substantial May Day demonstration on the streets of London, police surrounded about 3,000 people in Oxford Circus and did not allow them to leave for seven hours. The claimant who was present, but not involved in any of the . .
CitedRaissi and Another v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis QBD 30-Nov-2007
The claimants had been arrested under the 2000 Act, held for differing lengths of time and released without charge. They sought damages for false imprisonment.
Held: The officers had acted on their understanding that senior offcers had more . .
CitedCommissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Raissi CA 12-Nov-2008
The Commissioner appealed against an award of damages for false imprisonment. The claimant had been arrested shortly after a terrorist attack. The judge had held that they had no reasonable belief of his involvement. The Commissioner did not now . .
CitedRichardson v The Chief Constable of West Midlands Police QBD 29-Mar-2011
The claimant, a teacher, said he had been unlawfully arrested and detained after an allegation of assault from a pupil. Having attended the police station voluntarily, he said that the circumstances did not satisfy the required precondition that an . .
CitedHayes v Merseyside Police CA 29-Jul-2011
The claimant had been arrested after a complaint of harassment. The officer then contacted the complainant who then withdrew his complaint. The officer went to visit the complainant to discuss it further. On his return the claimant was released from . .
CitedHowarth v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis QBD 3-Nov-2011
The claimant sought judicial review of a decision to search him whilst travelling to a public protest in London. A previous demonstration involving this group had resulted in criminal damage, but neither the claimant nor his companions were found to . .
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.190122

Snell v Farrell: 1990

(Supreme Court of Canada) Sopinka J said: ‘The traditional approach to causation has come under attack in a number of cases in which there is concern that due to the complexities of proof, the probable victim of tortious conduct will be deprived of relief. This concern is strongest in circumstances in which, on the basis of some percentage of statistical probability, the plaintiff is the likely victim of the combined tortious conduct of a number of defendants, but cannot prove causation against a specific defendant or defendants on the basis of particularized evidence in accordance with traditional principles. The challenge to the traditional approach has manifested itself in cases dealing with non-traumatic injuries such as man-made diseases resulting from the widespread diffusion of chemical products, including product liability cases in which a product which can cause injury is widely manufactured and marketed by a large number of corporations.’

Judges:

Sopinka J

Citations:

[1990] 2 SCR 311

Jurisdiction:

Canada

Torts – Other

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.190112

Akerhielm v De Mare: PC 1959

A company prospectus contained the following: ‘About a third of the capital has already been subscribed in Denmark.’ Though the directors believed this to be true, it was not true at the time the prospectus was issued.
Held: The statement was not fraudulent having been made with an honest belief in its truth. When a party has been acquitted of fraud the decision in his favour should not be displaced except on the clearest grounds.
Lord Jenkins said: ‘their Lordships are satisfied that this is not one of those exceptional cases in which an appellate court is justified in reversing the decision of a judge at first instance when the decision under review is founded upon the judge’s opinion of the credibility of a witness formed after seeing and hearing him give his evidence. Their Lordships can hardly imagine a case in which the credibility of a witness could be more vital than a case like the present where the claim is based on deceit, and the witness in question is one of the defendants charged with deceit. Their Lordships would add that they accept, and would apply in the present case, the principle that where a defendant has been acquitted of fraud in a court of first instance the decision in his favour should not be displaced on appeal except on the clearest grounds.’ and ‘The question is not whether the defendant in any given case honestly believed the representation to be true in the sense assigned to it by the court on an objective consideration of its truth or falsity, but whether he honestly believed the representation to be true in the sense in which he understood it albeit erroneously when it was made.’

Judges:

Lord Jenkins

Citations:

[1959] AC 789, [1959] 3 All ER 485

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Citing:

CitedGlasier v Rolb 1889
A finding by a judge that a party is innocent of fraud should only reluctantly be disturbed. . .
CitedSS Hontestroom v SS Sagaporack HL 1927
The court discussed the weight to be given by an appellate court to findings of fact made by the court of first instance.
Held: Not to have seen the witnesses puts appellate judges in a permanent position of disadvantage as against the trial . .
CitedWatt (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 . .
CitedYuill v Yuill CA 1944
Appellate Court’s Caution in Reassessing Facts
The Court of Appeal was invited to reverse the decision of the judge at first instance to accept the evidence of the petitioner (no evidence having been called by the respondent).
Held: The court considered the caution needed when overturning . .
CitedBenmax v Austin Motor Co Ltd HL 1955
Except for cases which are expressly limited to questions of law, an appellant is entitled to appeal from the Court of Session to the House against any finding, whether it be a finding of law, a finding of fact or a finding involving both law and . .

Cited by:

CitedAssicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC) CA 13-Nov-2002
Rehearing/Review – Little Difference on Appeal
The appellant asked the Court to reverse a decision on the facts reached in the lower court.
Held: The appeal failed (Majority decision). The court’s approach should be the same whether the case was dealt with as a rehearing or as a review. . .
CitedThe Ikarian Reefer CA 1995
The court reversed the decision of the trial judge that the plaintiff insured shipowners had not deliberately scuttled their vessel or cast her away: ‘(1) The burden of showing that the trial Judge was wrong lies on the appellant . . (2) When . .
AppliedRyan and Another v Strickland Jarvis PC 29-Jun-2005
(Antigua and Barbuda) The parties disputed the effect of a joint venture of the sale of an additional range of cars through a car showroom. One party said the other had misrepresented thir contractual status, and the other said that an approach had . .
CitedYaqoob and Another v Royal Insurance (Uk) Ltd CA 25-May-2006
Appeal against refusal of insurance company to pay on fire loss claim. Building entered by intruders with key.
Held: ‘If after hearing the evidence the judge had been left in the position that he could not be satisfied, on the balance of . .
CitedCrystal Palace FC (2000) Ltd v Dowie QBD 14-Jun-2007
The parties had agreed a compromise on the leaving of the defendant as manager. The club now said that the agreement had been obtained by fraudulent misrepresentation. He had been released but had said he had not had contact with another London club . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Torts – Other, Company

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.187260

Moore v News of the World: CA 1972

An article was published which the plaintiff said left readers with the false apprehension that she had written it. She claimed under the statutory tort of false attribution.
Held: The judge was correct to direct the jury to make up their minds what the impression was to the reader. Confirming that a judge need not deal in detail with facts which were admitted by both parties when directing the jury in a defamation trial, ‘There were left out of the summing up, as out of every summing up which deserves the name, some of the things which one party, and probably both parties, would have liked put in; but there was no omission which could have led to a misunderstanding or injustice.’
Lord Denning MR set out section 5 of the 1952 Act and said: ‘That is a very complicated section, but it means that a Defendant is not to fail simply because he cannot prove every single thing in the libel to be true. If he proves the greater part of it to be true, theneven though there is a smaller part not proved, nevertheless the Defendant will win as long as the part not proved does not do the Plaintiff much more harm.’

Judges:

Stephenson LJ, Lord Denning MR

Citations:

[1972] 1 QB 441

Statutes:

Copyright Act 1956 843, Defamation Act 1952 5

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBasham v Gregory and Little Brown and Co CA 2-Jul-1998
The defendant sought a retrial of his action for defamation.
Held: The judge’s directions on meaning as to the respective contentions was correct, and also the allocation of the burden of proof. Whilst the court had reservations about the . .
CitedAlan Kenneth McKenzie Clark v Associated Newspapers Ltd PatC 21-Jan-1998
The claimant was a member of Parliament and an author. The defendant published a column which was said to give the impression that the claimant had written it. It was a parody. The claim was in passing off.
Held: The first issue was whether a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Torts – Other

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.185253

Cremdean Properties Ltd v Nash: CA 1977

The defendant had relied on a non-reliance clause in the special conditions of a tender: ‘Messrs. Lalonde Bros and Parham for themselves, for the vendors or landlord whose agents they are give notice that (a) These particulars are prepared for the convenience of an intending purchaser or tenant and although they are believed to be correct their accuracy is not guaranteed and any error, omission or misdescription shall not annul the sale or be grounds on which compensation may be claimed and neither do they constitute part of an offer of a contract. (b) Any intending purchaser or tenant must satisfy himself by inspection or otherwise as to the correctness of each of the statements contained in these particulars.’ The clause was an attempt to circumvent the 1967 Act (as amended).
Held: A statement of opinion if intended to be relied upon or acted upon could amount to a misrepresentation. The clause did come within section 3, but, Bridge LJ said, ‘Mr. Newsom’s able argument on behalf of the defendant can really be summarised very shortly. In effect what he says is this. The terms of the footnote are not simply, if contractual at all, a contractual exclusion either of any liability to which the defendant would otherwise be subject for any misrepresentation in the document, or of any remedy otherwise available on that ground to the plaintiff. The footnote is effective, so the argument runs, to nullify any representation in the document altogether; it is effective, so it is said, to bring about a situation in law as if no representation at all had ever been made. For my part, I am quite unable to accept that argument. I reject it primarily on the simple basis that on no reading of the language of the footnote could it have the remarkable effect contended for . . I am quite content to found my judgment in this case on the proposition that the language of the footnote relied upon by Mr. Newsom simply does not, on its true interpretation, have the effect contended for. But I would go further and say that if the ingenuity of a draftsman could devise language which would have that effect, I am extremely doubtful whether the court would allow it to operate so as to defeat section 3. Supposing the vendor included a clause which the purchaser was required to, and did, agree to in some such terms as ‘notwithstanding any statement of fact included in these particulars the vendor shall be conclusively deemed to have made no representation within the meaning of the Misrepresentation Act 1967,’ I should have thought that that was only a form of words the intended and actual effect of which was to exclude or restrict liability, and I should not have thought that the courts would have been ready to allow such ingenuity in forms of language to defeat the plain purpose at which section 3 is aimed.’
Scarman LJ agreed saying: ‘Nevertheless, the case for the appellant does have an audacity and a simple logic which I confess I find attractive. It runs thus: a statement is not a representation unless it is also a statement that what is stated is true. If in context a statement contains no assertion, express or implied, that its content is accurate, there is no representation. Ergo, there can be no misrepresentation; ergo, the Misrepresentation Act 1967 cannot apply to it. Humpty Dumpty would have fallen for this argument. If we were to fall for it, the Misrepresentation Act would be dashed to pieces which not all the King’s lawyers could put together again.’

Judges:

Bridge LJ, Scarman LJ

Citations:

(1977) 244 EG 547

Statutes:

Misrepresentation Act 1967 2(1) 3, Unfair Contract Terms Act 197

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedWilliam Sindall Plc v Cambridgeshire County Council CA 21-May-1993
Land was bought for development, but the purchaser later discovered a sewage pipe which very substantially limited its development potential. The existence of the pipe had not been disclosed on the sale, being unknown to the seller.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Contract

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.185666

Kenlin v Gardner: QBD 1967

Two school boys, visiting premises for a lawful purpose, aroused suspicion of police officers on duty in plain clothes. One officer produced his warrant card, stated that they were police officers and asked why they were calling at the houses. The boys did not believe that they were police officers. One of them made as if to run away and one of the constables caught hold of his arm and cautioned him. There was then a struggle which involved the other boy.
Held: The officer’s action in catching hold of two schoolboys was performed not in the course of arresting them but for the purpose of detaining them for questioning and so was unlawful.

Winn LJ said: ‘So one comes back to the question in the end, in the ultimate analysis: was this officer entitled in law to take hold of the first boy by the arm – of course the same situation arises with the other officer in regard to the second boy a little later – justified in committing that technical assault by the exercise of any power which he as a police constable in the precise circumstances prevailing at that exact moment possessed?
I regret, really, that I feel myself compelled to say that the answer to that question must be in the negative. This officer might or might not in the particular circumstances have possessed a power to arrest these boys. I leave that question open, saying no more than I feel some doubt whether he would have had a power of arrest: but on the assumption that he had a power to arrest it is to my mind perfectly plain that neither of these officers purported to arrest either of these boys. What was done was not done as an integral step in the process of arresting, but was done in order to secure an opportunity, by detaining the boys from escape, to put to them or either of them the question that was regarded as the test question to satisfy the officers whether or not it would be right in the circumstances, and having regard to the answer obtained from that question, if any, to arrest them.
I regret to say that I think there was a technical assault by the police officers.’

Judges:

Lord Parker CJ,, Winn LJ, Widgery J

Citations:

[1967] 2 QB 510

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

AppliedCollins v Wilcock QBD 1984
The defendant appealed against her conviction for assaulting a police constable in the execution of his duty. He had sought to caution her with regard to activity as a prostitute. The 1959 Act gave no power to detain, but he took hold of her. She . .
CitedWood v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 14-May-2008
The defendant challenged his conviction for obstructing a police officer and threatening behaviour. The officer had taken hold of him to restrain him, not intending to arrest him, but only to establish whether he was a person they were looking for. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.186337

Elsee v Smith: 1822

The court considered a claim that a search warrant had been issued for malice.

Citations:

(1822) 2 Chit 304

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedGibbs and others v Rea PC 29-Jan-1998
(Cayman Islands) The respondent worked for a bank. He disclosed a business interest, but that interest grew in importance to the point where he resigned in circumstances amounting to constructive dismissal. His home and business officers were raided . .
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: . .
CitedCrawford v Jenkins CA 24-Jul-2014
The parties had divorced but acrimony continued. H now complained of his arrests after allegations from his former wife that he had breached two orders. He had been released and no charges followed. The court had ruled that W’s complaints were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.184699

Evans v London Hospital Medical College and Others: 1981

The defendants employed by the first defendant carried out a post mortem on the plaintiff’s infant son. They found concentrations of morphine and told the police. The plaintiff was charged with the murder of her son. After further investigation no evidence was offered and she was acquitted. She claimed damages for negligence against the defendants in allowing the organs removed from her son’s body to become contaminated with morphine and in failing to appreciate that the high concentration of morphine revealed by analysis was unlikely to have existed while he was still alive.
Held: Immunity from suit was available to potential witnesses in criminal proceedings at a time when such proceedings were merely in contemplation but had not yet commenced, and covers all conduct that can fairly be said to be part of the investigatory process.
Drake J said: ‘If this object is to be achieved I think it essential that the immunity given to a witness should also extend to cover statements he makes prior to the issue of a writ or commencement of a prosecution, provided that the statement is made for the purpose of a possible action or prosecution and at a time when a possible action or prosecution is being considered. In a large number of criminal cases the police have collected statements from witnesses before anyone is charged with an offence; indeed sometimes before it is known whether or not any criminal offence has been committed . . If immunity did not extend to such statements it would mean that the immunity attached to the giving of evidence in court or the formal statements made in preparation for the court hearing could easily be outflanked and rendered of little use. For the same reason I think that the immunity must extend also to the acts of the witness in collecting or considering material on which he may later be called to give evidence. If it does not so extend then a convicted person could, for example, sue the police officers for the allegedly negligent manner in which they had investigated the crime, by complaining that they had wrongly assessed the evidential value of certain matters or had failed to interview possible witnesses whose evidence was thought by the accused to be favourable to him.’

Judges:

Drake J

Citations:

[1981] 1 WLR 184, [1981] 1 All ER 715

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedDarker v Chief Constable of The West Midlands Police HL 1-Aug-2000
The plaintiffs had been indicted on counts alleging conspiracy to import drugs and conspiracy to forge traveller’s cheques. During the criminal trial it emerged that there had been such inadequate disclosure by the police that the proceedings were . .
Dicta approvedTaylor and Others v Director of The Serious Fraud Office and Others HL 29-Oct-1998
The defendant had requested the Isle of Man authorities to investigate the part if any taken by the plaintiff in a major fraud. No charges were brought against the plaintiff, but the documents showing suspicion came to be disclosed in the later . .
CitedMeadow v General Medical Council Admn 17-Feb-2006
The appellant challenged being struck off the medical register. He had given expert evidence in a criminal case which was found misleading and to have contributed to a wrongful conviction for murder.
Held: The evidence though mistaken was . .
CitedWestcott v Westcott QBD 30-Oct-2007
The claimant said that his daughter in law had defamed him. She answered that the publication was protected by absolute privilege. She had complained to the police that he had hit her and her infant son.
Held: ‘the process of taking a witness . .
CitedWestcott v Westcott CA 15-Jul-2008
The defendant was the claimant’s daughter in law. In the course of a bitter divorce she made allegations to the police which were investigated but did not lead to a prosecution. The claimant appealed dismissal of his claim for defamation on the . .
CitedSilcott v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis CA 24-May-1996
The claimant had been convicted of the murder of PC Blakelock. The only substantial evidence was in the form of the notes of interview he said were fabricated by senior officers. His eventual appeal on this basis was not resisted. He now appealed . .
CitedJones v Kaney SC 30-Mar-2011
An expert witness admitted signing a joint report but without agreeing to it. The claimant who had lost his case now pursued her in negligence. The claimant appealed against a finding that the expert witness was immune from action.
Held: The . .
CitedSmart v The Forensic Science Service Ltd CA 2-Jul-2013
On a search of his house, the police found a bullet cartridge on the claimant’s property. It was sent for testing but due to a mistake it was reported as a live cartridge. The prosecution was only dropped after some months when the mistake was . .
CitedCrawford v Jenkins CA 24-Jul-2014
The parties had divorced but acrimony continued. H now complained of his arrests after allegations from his former wife that he had breached two orders. He had been released and no charges followed. The court had ruled that W’s complaints were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Torts – Other

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.184732

Hicks v Faulkner: 1878

Before charging a prisoner, a police officer must have ‘an honest belief in the guilt of the accused based upon a full conviction, founded upon reasonable grounds, of the existence of a state of circumstances, which, assuming them to be true, would reasonably lead any ordinary prudent and cautious man, placed in the position of the accuser to the conclusion that the person was probably guilty of the crime imputed.’
Once a plaintiff has established his imprisonment, the onus then lies on the defendant to ‘plead and prove affirmatively the existence of reasonable cause’.

Judges:

Judge Hawkins

Citations:

[1878] 8 QBD 167

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.’ . .
CitedOsman v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-Oct-1998
Police’s Complete Immunity was Too Wide
(Grand Chamber) A male teacher developed an obsession with a male pupil. He changed his name by deed poll to the pupil’s surname. He was required to teach at another school. The pupil’s family’s property was subjected to numerous acts of vandalism, . .
ApprovedHerniman v Smith HL 1938
The court considered the tort of malicious prosecution.
Held: It is the duty of a prosecutor to find out not whether there is a possible defence, but whether there is a reasonable and probable cause for prosecution. The House approved the . .
CitedGibbs and others v Rea PC 29-Jan-1998
(Cayman Islands) The respondent worked for a bank. He disclosed a business interest, but that interest grew in importance to the point where he resigned in circumstances amounting to constructive dismissal. His home and business officers were raided . .
CitedMatin v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis CA 20-Jun-2002
The claimant sought to have restored his claim for malicious prosecution.
Held: ‘The fact that there might be an arguable case that the prosecutor was activated by malice, that is to say, to prosecute for an improper motive, does not of itself . .
CitedMcHarg v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police ChD 9-Jan-2004
The claimant police officer sought damages for malicious prosecution. The defendant applied for the claim to be struck out.
Held: There was insufficient evidence to establish malice. The claim was struck out. . .
CitedRowlands v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police CA 20-Dec-2006
The claimant succeeded in her claims for general damages against the respondent for personal injury, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution, but appealed refusal of the court to award aggravated damages against the chief constable.
Held: . .
CitedMoulton v Chief Constable of The West Midlands CA 13-May-2010
The claimant appealed against dismissal of his claim for damages for malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office. He had been arrested and held on allegations of serious sexual assaults, but then released when the matter came to the Crown . .
CitedBT v Crown Prosecution Service CA 16-Dec-1997
The plaintiff appealed against dismissal of his claim for malicious prosecution brought against the Service.
Held: Actions for malicious prosecution, against the Crown Prosecution Service are to be examined closely to ensure that they are not . .
CitedWilliamson v The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago PC 3-Sep-2014
(Trinidad and Tobago) The claimant had been held after arrest on suspicion of theft. He was held for several months before the case was dismissed, the posecution having made no apparent attempt to further the prosecution. He appealed against refusal . .
CitedMotasim v Crown Prosecution Service and Others QBD 15-Aug-2017
The claimant had been arrested on suspicion of terrorism, from his innocent association with people later convicted of terrorism. The defendant discovered evidence which would undermine the case against him, but refuse to disclose it. Eventually, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.183666

Janvier v Sweeney: 1919

During the First World War Mlle Janvier lived as a paid companion in a house in Mayfair and corresponded with her German lover who was interned as an enemy alien on the Isle of Man. Sweeney was a private detective who wanted secretly to obtain some of her employer’s documents and sent his assistant to induce her to co-operate by pretending to be from Scotland Yard and saying that the authorities wanted her because she was corresponding with a German spy. Mlle Janvier suffered severe nervous shock from which she took a long time to recover.
Held: The assistant was acting within the scope of his employment and the two detectives were liable. The jury awarded her andpound;250.

Citations:

[1919] 2 KB 316

Citing:

FollowedWilkinson v Downton 8-May-1997
Thomas Wilkinson, the landlord of a public house, went off by train, leaving his wife Lavinia behind the bar. A customer of the pub, Downton played a practical joke on her. He told her, falsely, that her husband had been involved in an accident and . .

Cited by:

CitedWong v Parkside Health NHS Trust and Another CA 16-Nov-2001
The claimant had sued her former employer for post-traumatic stress resulting from alleged harassment at her place of work. The claimant appealed against an order refusing damages. The court had held that outside the 1997 Act which was not in force . .
CitedWainwright and another v Home Office HL 16-Oct-2003
The claimant and her son sought to visit her other son in Leeds Prison. He was suspected of involvement in drugs, and therefore she was subjected to strip searches. There was no statutory support for the search. The son’s penis had been touched . .
CitedHunter and Others v Canary Wharf Ltd HL 25-Apr-1997
The claimant, in a representative action complained that the works involved in the erection of the Canary Wharf tower constituted a nuisance in that the works created substantial clouds of dust and the building blocked her TV signals, so as to limit . .
CitedRhodes v OPO and Another SC 20-May-2015
The mother sought to prevent a father from publishing a book about her child’s life. It was to contain passages she said may cause psychological harm to the 12 year old son. Mother and son lived in the USA and the family court here had no . .
CitedOPO v MLA and Another CA 9-Oct-2014
The claimant child sought to prevent publication by his father of an autobiography which, he said, would be likely to cause him psychological harm. The father was well known classical musician who said that he had himself suffered sexual abuse as a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.182251

Glinski 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.’
A charging officer is simply required to make an assessment of whether there is sufficient evidence to withstand examination in the course of ‘a fair and impartial trial’.
The idea of malice covered ‘any motive other than a desire to bring a criminal to justice’. ‘such difficulty as there is in the correct statement and application of the law as to want of reasonable and probable cause, arises from the fact that, while it is for the judge to determine (whether as fact or law) whether there was such want, it is for the jury to determine any disputed facts which are relevant to that determination.’
The House discussed the interaction between malice and want of honest belief: ‘though from want of probable cause malice may and often is inferred, even from the most express malice, want of probable cause, of which honest belief is an ingredient, is not to be inferred.’
Lord Devlin observed: ‘At first sight it is undoubtedly an attractive proposition that a police officer should not be expected to hold an opinion about the guilt and innocence of those he prosecutes; a prosecuting counsel is not expected to hold such an opinion any more than the magistrate who commits for trial . . It derives, I think, a lot of its attraction from the ambiguous use of the word ‘guilt’. If the word is used without qualification, I entirely agree, for the reasons I have given, that a police officer should not be expected to hold an opinion. But when the question to which his mind ought to be directed is no more than the strength of his case, I think it would be unsatisfactory and impracticable to attempt to distinguish between facts proved directly and facts inferred, or (for inference depends on opinion), between fact and opinion generally. Opinion enters into everything from the beginning. The value of a statement taken from a witness depends, until it is tested in court, on the officer’s opinion of the witness’s honesty, accuracy and power of observation.’
Viscount Simonds discussed the extent to which an officer should investigate a possible defence: ‘A question is sometimes raised whether the prosecutor has acted with too great haste or zeal and failed to ascertain by inquiries that he might have made facts that would have altered his opinion upon the guilt of the accused. Upon this matter it is not possible to generalise, but I would accept as a guiding principle what Lord Atkin said in Herniman v Smith [1938] AC 305, that it is the duty of a prosecutor to find out not whether there is a possible defence but whether there is a reasonable and probable cause for prosecution.’

Judges:

Lord Denning, Lord Devlin, Viscount Simonds

Citations:

[1962] AC 726, [1962] 1 All ER 696

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedDawson v Vasandau 1863
It is not necessary for a charging officer to believe that the prosecution will result in a conviction before charging a prisoner. . .
CitedTempest 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 . .
CitedHicks v Faulkner 1878
Before charging a prisoner, a police officer must have ‘an honest belief in the guilt of the accused based upon a full conviction, founded upon reasonable grounds, of the existence of a state of circumstances, which, assuming them to be true, would . .
CitedHerniman v Smith HL 1938
The court considered the tort of malicious prosecution.
Held: It is the duty of a prosecutor to find out not whether there is a possible defence, but whether there is a reasonable and probable cause for prosecution. The House approved the . .

Cited by:

CitedPalomares 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 . .
CitedOsman v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-Oct-1998
Police’s Complete Immunity was Too Wide
(Grand Chamber) A male teacher developed an obsession with a male pupil. He changed his name by deed poll to the pupil’s surname. He was required to teach at another school. The pupil’s family’s property was subjected to numerous acts of vandalism, . .
CitedGibbs and others v Rea PC 29-Jan-1998
(Cayman Islands) The respondent worked for a bank. He disclosed a business interest, but that interest grew in importance to the point where he resigned in circumstances amounting to constructive dismissal. His home and business officers were raided . .
CitedKeegan and Others v Chief Constable of Merseyside CA 3-Jul-2003
The police had information suggesting (wrongly) that a fugitive resided at an address. An armed raid followed, and the claimant occupant sought damages.
Held: The tort of malicious procurement of a search warrant required it to be established . .
CitedMcHarg v Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police ChD 9-Jan-2004
The claimant police officer sought damages for malicious prosecution. The defendant applied for the claim to be struck out.
Held: There was insufficient evidence to establish malice. The claim was struck out. . .
CitedMatin v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis CA 20-Jun-2002
The claimant sought to have restored his claim for malicious prosecution.
Held: ‘The fact that there might be an arguable case that the prosecutor was activated by malice, that is to say, to prosecute for an improper motive, does not of itself . .
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 . .
CitedCoudrat v Revenue and Customs CA 26-May-2005
The claimant appealed against dismissal of his claim for false imprisonment and malicious prosecution against the Customs and Excise. He was arrested and held accused of VAT fraud. Proceedings were discontinued. He had signed an application for . .
CitedClifford v The Chief Constable of The Hertfordshire Constabulary QBD 1-Apr-2011
The claimant alleged malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office bought by the claimant who was charged with child pornography offences in July 2004. The prosecution had eventually offered no evidence. He said that it should have been . .
CitedBT v Crown Prosecution Service CA 16-Dec-1997
The plaintiff appealed against dismissal of his claim for malicious prosecution brought against the Service.
Held: Actions for malicious prosecution, against the Crown Prosecution Service are to be examined closely to ensure that they are not . .
CitedWilliamson v The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago PC 3-Sep-2014
(Trinidad and Tobago) The claimant had been held after arrest on suspicion of theft. He was held for several months before the case was dismissed, the posecution having made no apparent attempt to further the prosecution. He appealed against refusal . .
CitedMotasim v Crown Prosecution Service and Others QBD 15-Aug-2017
The claimant had been arrested on suspicion of terrorism, from his innocent association with people later convicted of terrorism. The defendant discovered evidence which would undermine the case against him, but refuse to disclose it. Eventually, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Police

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.182185

Bullen v Swan Electric Engineering Co: 1907

The duty of a bailee is to take reasonable care of the goods concerned, the bailee bearing the burden of proof of absence of fault.

Citations:

(1907) 23 TLR 258

Cited by:

CitedThakrar v The Secretary of State for Justice Misc 31-Dec-2015
County Court sitting at Milton Keynes. The claimant prisoner sought damages saying that his personal property had been damaged whilst in the care of the defendant.
Held: The claims succeeded in part. Some damage was deliberate. There was a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.558305

Raissi v Commissioner of Police: QBD 15 Nov 2007

Claim for damages for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment. The claimants had been arrested an held as brothers of a third brother arrested for suspicion of involvement in the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the US. The police applied to have excluded documents including interception warrants.

Judges:

McCombe J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 3421 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Terrorism Act 2000 41(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.271255

McGowan v Chief Constable of Kingston Upon Hull: 21 Oct 1967

The defendant police officers had gone into a house where a child was being held in a man’s arms. The police officers said that they had reason to think that a breach of the peace might occur between the man and his mistress. The question arose as to whether the mistress had authority to give an invitation to the police officers to come in.
Held: Parker LCJ said: ‘Regardless of the invitation, there was sufficient to justify the police entering the house on the basis that they genuinely suspected a danger of breach of the peace occurring.’

Judges:

Parker LCJ, Widgery, O’Connor JJ

Citations:

Times 21-Oct-1967

Cited by:

CitedMcLeod, Mealing (deceased) v Metropolitan Police Commissioner CA 3-Feb-1994
The plaintiff appealed against the dismissal of her claims for trespass and breach of duty by the defendant’s officers. In divorce proceedings, she had been ordered to return certain household goods to her husband, but had failed yet to do so. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.543044

Wauton v Coppard: 1899

A statement was made as to the meaning or effect of a document can amount to an actionable misrepresentation. The defendant had said that running a boys’ school was not capable of amounting to nuisance, but he was wrong.The running of a boys’ school would have its inherent problem of noise generation, such as bell ringing, boys shouting at play or noise generated when the boys were let out from school, and that may cause nuisance to other people.
Held: A statement as to the meaning or effect of a document can amount to an actionable misrepresentation.

Judges:

Romer J

Citations:

[1899] 1 Ch 92

Cited by:

CitedHayward v Zurich Insurance Company Plc CA 31-Mar-2015
The claimant sought damages alleging his back had been injured at work. The insurers accepted liability but said that the claimant had exaggerated the extent of his injury. The claim was settled, but later a neighbour of the claimants said that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.545145

Davy v Garrett: 1878

It is not sufficient in pleadings to allege facts from which fraud might be inferred but which are also consistent with innocence.
Thesiger LJ said: ‘Fraudulent conduct must be distinctly alleged and distinctly proved, and it [is] not allowable to leave fraud to be inferred from the facts’ and ‘General allegations, however strong may be the words in which they are stated, are insufficient to amount to an averment of fraud of which any court ought to take notice.’

Judges:

Thesiger LJ

Citations:

(1878) 7 ChD 473

Cited by:

CitedArmitage v Nurse; etc CA 19-Mar-1997
A clause in a trust deed may validly excuse trustees from personal liability for even gross negligence. The trustee was exempted from liability for loss or damage ‘unless such loss or damage shall be caused by his own actual fraud’.
Held: The . .
CitedStocker v Stocker QBD 10-Jun-2015
The claimant alleged defamation by his former wife in a post on facebook. The posting and associatedeEmails were said falsely to have accused him of serious abuse, and that the accusations had undermined his relationship with his new partner.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Litigation Practice

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.548011

Williams v Spautz: 27 Jul 1992

(High Court of Australia) Criminal Law – Abuse of process – Stay of proceedings – Action for wrongful dismissal against university – Information for criminal defamation by plaintiff against officer of university – Predominant purpose of informant to secure reinstatement or favourable settlement of action – Whether abuse of process.
Brennan J attempted a partial definition of purpose in the context of the tort of abuse of process, committed when a person conducts litigation for a purpose other than that for which the court’s process is designed: ‘Purpose, when used in reference to a transaction, has two elements: the first, a result which the transaction is capable of producing; the second, the result which the person or persons who engage in or control the transaction intend it to produce. Or, to express the concept in different terms, the purpose of a transaction is the result which it is capable of producing and is intended to produce.’

Judges:

Mason CJ, Brennan, Deane, Dawson, Toohey, Gaudron and McHugh JJ

Citations:

61 A Crim R 431, (1992) 66 ALJR 585, 107 ALR 635, (1992) 174 CLR 509, [1992] HCA 34

Links:

Austlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHayes v Willoughby SC 20-Mar-2013
The claimant and appellant had been employer and employee who had fallen out, with a settlement in 2005. The appellant then began an unpleasant and obsessive personal vendetta against Mr Hayes, complaining to public bodies with allegations of tax . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Torts – Other

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.471929

CASE XLI 2 Cr 8, 302-3 Hob 6, Brock v Spencer: 1220

Trespass in Dale, the defendant pleads that the place alledged in the new assiginment is parcel of a manor or in parochia de Dale praedict. Upon not guilty pleaded, the visne shall be of Dale ; for the word preedict makes the vill and parish all one.
Judged in the Exchequer-chamber.

Citations:

[1220] EngR 236, (1220-1623) Jenk 294, (1220) 145 ER 214 (A)

Links:

Commonlii

Land, Torts – Other

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.461148

Lynn v Bamber: 1930

A cause of action in contract arises when the contract is breached. Talbot J said: ‘There is no question that the three learned judges who decided that case stated in emphatic and unambiguous language that contributory negligence is a good defence to an action of this class; but it is said that the expression of opinion can be disregarded in this court because it is not necessary for the purpose of deciding that case that that opinion should be expressed. I do not agree, any more than the other members of this court, that that expression of opinion was in fact unnecessary, and it appears to me that it is not legitimate to say that it should be disregarded . . If a judge thinks it desirable to give his opinion on some point which is not necessary for the decision of the case, that of course has not the binding weight of the decision of the case and the reasons for decision. It seems to me, however, to be an abuse of language to describe as obiter dicta the deliberate pronouncements in Dew’s Case, which were all made expressly as reasons for the decision to which the court there came, and even if I did not assent to them, I should certainly regard these pronouncements as authoritative.’

Judges:

Talbot J

Citations:

[1930] 2 KB 72

Citing:

CitedDew v United British Steamship Co CA 1928
. .

Cited by:

CitedSecretary of State for Communities and Local Government and Another v Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council SC 6-Apr-2011
The land-owner had planning permission to erect a barn, conditional on its use for agricultural purposes. He built inside it a house and lived there from 2002. In 2006. He then applied for a certificate of lawful use. The inspector allowed it, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Contract

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.431889

Ahmed v Kendrick: 1987

The effect of the passing of a beneficial interest by a fraudster owner of that interest to a third party is to sever the beneficial joint tenancy.

Citations:

(1987) 56 PandCR 120

Cited by:

CitedBowling and Co Solicitors v Edehomo ChD 2-Mar-2011
The court was asked ‘when an innocent vendor whose signature is forged on the documents for the conveyance of land suffers damage, for the purposes of limitation of an action arising from a solicitor’s breach of duty. Is it on the exchange of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Trusts, Torts – Other

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.430277