Category: Torts – Other

Law Debenture Trust Corporation Plc v Ural Caspian Oil Corp Ltd: CA 10 Mar 1994

An assignment which was made intending to defeat a third party’s rights is not itself a cause of action.

Citations:

Independent 10-Mar-1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – The Law Debenture Trust Corporation v Ural Caspian Oil Corp Ltd ChD 9-Sep-1992
The burden of agreements binding on shares which had been assigned did not pass simpliciter with the shares. . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – The Law Debenture Trust Corporation v Ural Caspian Oil Corp Ltd ChD 9-Sep-1992
The burden of agreements binding on shares which had been assigned did not pass simpliciter with the shares. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.82959

Kuwait Airways Corporation v Iraqi Airways Company and Another (No 5): QBD 8 Jun 2000

The test of the forseeability of damages in case involving wrongful interference with goods, should be used instead of asking whether or not the damage was the direct or indirect consequence of the tort. The issue arose from failure to see the real issue was usually whether the case arose from contract or tort. No one formulation can encompass all the issues. Though wrongful interference is a tort of strict liability, the test should be that adopted generally in tort, namely the forseeability of the damage complained of.

Citations:

Times 31-May-2000, Gazette 08-Jun-2000

Damages, Torts – Other

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.82866

De Balkany v Christie Manson and Woods Ltd: QBD 19 Jan 1995

Over-painting was deemed to be a forgery within the Christie terms and conditions. The exception was excluded. Christie’s was liable under the guarantee it had given. Morison J also considered (obiter) the defendant’s possible liability in tort, and whether they had assumed responsibility for the attribution: ‘I first look at the question generally without reference to the conditions.
The special features of this case are that Christie’s themselves have sole discretion over how they describe a lot. This fact is made known to buyers, in the sense that Christie’s disclose to potential bidders some of the terms on which they are acting for the seller. Christie’s employ skilled personnel who take considerable trouble to satisfy themselves as to the accuracy of the catalogue entries. This is well known. Buyers will know, therefore, that Christie’s have satisfied themselves as to the authenticity of a Lot, and the cataloguing practice which is disclosed, gives considerable latitude for appropriate qualifications where Christie’s are of the opinion that such is called for. The buyer is required to pay a substantial premium to the auctioneer. If the auctioneer assumes no responsibility to him, one might ask what the payment is for. On the other hand, in normal circumstances, a buyer has no reason to believe that an auctioneer has assumed any responsibility to him. The auctioneer is the seller’s agent. The buyer only becomes contractually bound by the conditions when his bid has been accepted.
On balance, and primarily because Christie’s take responsibility for the catalogue description which is an important feature from the buyer’s point of view, and because the buyer pays a premium, I would be inclined to the view that there was an assumption of responsibility such that Christie’s become liable to a buyer for negligent misstatement in the catalogue entries.
Do the Conditions affect this conclusion? Condition 3(a) says that statements in the catalogue are statements of Christie’s opinion. Condition 11(a), under what might be thought to be an inappropriate heading ‘Guarantee’, excludes responsibility for the ‘correctness’ of any such statement but it does not, in terms, exclude responsibility for negligence. Condition 3(c) says that buyers must satisfy themselves as to the opinions expressed in the catalogue. I am, somewhat reluctantly, forced to the conclusion that Christie’s have made it reasonably clear that they have not assumed any responsibility to the buyer for the way in which the statements in the catalogue are prepared.
In my judgment, a buyer at Christie’s, as a buyer at a car auction, must satisfy himself about the goods and cannot, in law, rely upon what Christie’s have said. The only right which a buyer has is that given to him by clause 11(b) where there is a forgery or where Christie’s have been guilty of deceit. I do not regard this conclusion as satisfactory because it means that a buyer has got nothing of substance for his premium.’

Judges:

Morison J

Citations:

Independent 19-Jan-1995, (1997) 16 Tr LR 163

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Morin v Bonhams and Brooks Ltd and Another ComC 18-Mar-2003
Claim for rescission of contract for purchase of Ferrari car at auction after discovery of alteration to odometer.
Jonathan Hirst QC said (after discussing the Christie’s case): ‘Plainly this authority provides substantial ammunition for BandB . .
Cited – Morin v Bonhams and Brooks Limited Bonhams and Brooks S A M CA 18-Dec-2003
The claimant had bought a vintage Ferrari motor car through the defendant auctioneers in Monaco but sought rescission after it appeared that the odometer had been altered. The auction conditions purported to exclude any description of the car. He . .
Cited – Avrora Fine Arts Investment Ltd v Christie, Manson and Woods Ltd ChD 27-Jul-2012
The claimants had bought a painting (Odalisque) through the defendant auctioneers. They now claimed that it had been misattributed to Kustodiev, and claimed in negligence and misrepresentation.
Held: Based on the connoisseurship evidence, the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Torts – Other

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.79849

Rosenthal v Alderton and Sons Limited: CA 1946

The court was asked as to how it should value goods which had disappeared, and where the plaintiff sought damages for their wrongful detention, either as at the date of the detention or as at the date of the judgment.
Held: Damages for detinue were to be based on the value of the item at the time of the judgment. Lord Evershed MR said in the course of answering: ‘it is further to be noted that the action of detinue was essentially a proprietary action implying property in the plaintiff in the goods claimed’, and then a reference is made to Viner’s Abridgement vol 8 p23 and Holdsworth, History of English Law vol 7, pp 438 and 439. ‘ It was, and still is, of the essence of an action of detinue that the plaintiff maintains and asserts his property in the goods claimed.
I think that the rights of the plaintiff as regards these goods were not such as entitled him to bring an action in detinue against the defendant, in whose possession they were, as agent, as the time, of the person in whom the property in the goods was then vested’.

Judges:

Lord Evershed MR

Citations:

[1946] KB 374

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Iran v The Barakat Galleries Ltd QBD 29-Mar-2007
The claimant government sought the return to it of historical artefacts in the possession of the defendants. The defendant said the claimant could not establish title and that if it could the title under which the claim was made was punitive and not . .
Cited – Carlton Greer v Alstons Engineering Sales and Services Limited PC 19-Jun-2003
PC (Trinidad and Tobago) The claimant had bought an expensiv agriucltural tool (a hoe) from the defendants. It was defective and her returned it repeatedly for repair. Eventually they refused to allow him to test . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Damages

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.258520

Cakebread v Hopping Bros Ltd: CA 1947

Cohen LJ discussed the doctrine of ex turpi causa non oritur actio, saying: ‘The maxim ex turpi causa is based on public policy, and it seems to me plain on the facts of this case that public policy, far from requiring that this action shall be dismissed, requires that it shall be entertained and decided on its merits.’

Judges:

Cohen LJ

Citations:

[1947] KB 641

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – National Coal Board v England HL 1954
The plaintiff sought damages after being injured when a co-worker fired a shot. The employee however had himself coupled the detonator to the cable rather than leaving it to the shotfirer, and had his cimmitted a criminal offence. He had been found . .
Cited – Vellino v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police CA 31-Jul-2001
The police were not under any duty to protect someone who had been arrested from injuring himself in an attempt to escape. The claimant had a history of seeking to avoid capture by jumping from his flat window. On this occasion he injured himself in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.258465

PP v The Home Office and Another: QBD 30 Mar 2017

The claimant had said that she was a victim of human trafficking. That claim being rejected, she was taken into immigration detention. She now claimed that this was unlawful.
Held: That the request for review was out of time did not defeat the claim where, the strict requirement having been relaxed because of the nature of the claim. However, the claim of false imprisonment should not be struck out.

Judges:

Parkes QC HHJ

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 663 (QB), [2017] WLR(D) 233

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Judicial Review, Human Rights, Immigration, Torts – Other

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.581416

Hillesden Securities Ltd v Ryjack: QBD 1983

Parker LJ discussed the case of Strand Electric and said: ‘The action in that case was in detinue and not conversion, but there will in almost all cases of detinue have been an original act of conversion also and what was in effect held in that case was that, in the case of conversion of a profit earning chattel which a defendant has used for his own benefit, the owner can recover by way of damages a hire charge plus either the return of the chattel or, if there has been a subsequent conversion by disposal, the value of the chattel at the date of such conversion.’

Judges:

Parker J

Citations:

[1983] 1 WLR 959, [1983] 2 All ER 184, [1983] RTR 491

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Strand Electric and Engineering Co Ltd v Berisford Entertainments Ltd 1952
The court assessed the amount of damages for the wrongful refusal to deliver up portable switchboards which the owner would not have used anyway (detinue). The measure was a sum equivalent to the price or hire that a reasonable person would pay for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 07 April 2022; Ref: scu.276911

Hincks v Sense Network Ltd: QBD 15 Mar 2018

The claimant sought damages alleging that a reference given by the defendant gave a misleading impression: ‘The action raises the issue of the nature of the duty which is owed by a reference writer to the subject of the reference and, in particular, whether in discharging that duty, a reference writer should consider the adequacy and fairness of antecedent investigations upon which facts and opinions in the reference are based.’

Judges:

Lambert J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 533 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Torts – Other

Updated: 07 April 2022; Ref: scu.608674

Sharma v Wells and Medico-Legal Investigations Ltd: QBD 2003

The court struck out a claim for damages against an employer for harassment under the 1997 Act.

Judges:

Gray J

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 1230

Statutes:

Protection from Harassment Act 1977

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust CA 16-Mar-2005
The claimant had sought damages against his employer, saying that they had failed in their duty to him under the 1997 Act in failing to prevent harassment by a manager. He appealed a strike out of his claim.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 07 April 2022; Ref: scu.241423

Anami Holdings and Another v Gill: ChD 6 Oct 2014

The claimants alleged that Mr Gill had, in effect, defrauded them of some andpound;8 million, and a freezing order was obtained on an application without notice in the autumn of 2011. Within a month or so, that freezing order had been discharged. On learning that a later judgment in different proceedings had gone in favour of the defendant, the claimant had then obtained an order charging the proceeds of that judgment. That claim had been settled on agreed terms, but the claimant now sought further orders under that settlement.

Judges:

David Richards J

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 3800 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other

Updated: 07 April 2022; Ref: scu.539773

Cunningham v Glasgow City Council: SCS 8 Aug 2008

The pursuer, a teacher, claimed under health and safety laws of the injury suffered working for the defenders. He said that he had also suffered harassment for which his employers were vicariously responsible. The defenders said that the action was not strictly a personal injury claim within chapter 43, since injuries under the 1997 Act were for a statutory delict.

Citations:

[2008] ScotCS CSOH – 113

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Protection from Harassment Act 1997, Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 18B

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Torts – Other, Health and Safety, Vicarious Liability, Limitation

Updated: 06 April 2022; Ref: scu.272504

MK Airlines Ltd v Katz and Another (Acting As Joint Liquidator of MK Airlines): ChD 16 Mar 2018

Appeal against orders made following successful misfeasance claims brought by the joint liquidators of an insolvent company against one of its former administrators.

Judges:

Sarah Worthington QC DHCJ

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 540 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Insolvency, Torts – Other

Updated: 06 April 2022; Ref: scu.606431

Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd: QBD 26 Jul 2011

The claimant alleged defamation and malicious falsehood in an article published and written by the defendants. She complained that she was said to have fabricated an interview with the second defendant for her book. An interview of sorts had now been accepted to have taken place.
Held: To be counted as defamatory an allegation must pass a certain threshold of seriousness.
‘A reviewer is entitled to be spiteful, so long as she is honest, but if she is spiteful, the court may more readily conclude that misstatements of fact are not honest, since spite or ill will is a motive for dishonesty.’ The defendant knew or should have known that the accusation that the claimant was a liar was itself false. The offer of amends provided no defence to the claim for libel. The court also found malice, that the defamation had continued on the defendant’s website after they should have removed it and that the defamation was motivated by legal malice. The allegation that in practising ‘reflexive ethnography’ the claimant was giving a right of copy approval to intervviewees was also known to be false and was damaging.
The court awarded damages of andpound;65,000.

Judges:

Tugendhat J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 1884 (QB), [2012] EMLR 8, [2011] 1 WLR 1985

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd QBD 12-Nov-2009
The claimant sought damages for an article in the defendant’s newspaper, a review of her book which said she had falsely claimed to have interviewed artists including the review author and that the claimant allowed interviewees control over what was . .
See Also – Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd CA 29-Mar-2010
. .
See Also – Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd QBD 16-Jun-2010
The claimant said that a review of her book was defamatory and a malicious falsehood. The defendant now sought summary judgment or a ruling as to the meaning of the words complained of.
Held: The application for summary judgment succeeded. The . .
See Also – Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd QBD 4-Feb-2011
The defendant sought permission to amend its defence to the claim in malicious falsehood. . .
See Also – Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd QBD 27-May-2011
The defendant appealed against an order refusing trial by judge alone on the basis that the application had been made out of time. . .
See Also – Telegraph Media Group Ltd v Thornton CA 22-Jun-2011
. .
Cited – Horrocks v Lowe HL 1974
The plaintiff complained of an alleged slander spoken at a meeting of the Town Council. The council meeting was an occasion attracting qualified privilege. The judge at trial found that the councillor honestly believed that what he had said in the . .
Cited – Armagas Ltd v Mundogas SA (‘The Ocean Frost’) CA 1985
Proof of corruption not needed for bribe
In establishing that money was paid as an improper inducement or bribe, proof of corruptness or a corrupt motive was unnecessary.
When a court looks at a decision of a judge at first instance, the court stressed the need to look at the . .
Cited – In re B (Children) (Care Proceedings: Standard of Proof) (CAFCASS intervening) HL 11-Jun-2008
Balance of probabilities remains standard of proof
There had been cross allegations of abuse within the family, and concerns by the authorities for the children. The judge had been unable to decide whether the child had been shown to be ‘likely to suffer significant harm’ as a consequence. Having . .
Cited – Milne v Express Newspapers CA 28-May-2004
The claimant, having not accepted an offer to make amends, wanted to proceed to a jury trial. To be permitted to do so, he had to seek to establish that the defendants ‘knew or had reason to believe that the statement complained of . . was both . .
Cited – Abu v MGN Ltd QBD 2003
There should be nothing in any sense ‘rough and ready’ about the assessment of the claimant’s reputation under the offer of amends procedure in the 1996 Act. If compensation is not agreed it should be determined by the court on the same principles . .
Cited – In re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) HL 14-Dec-1995
Evidence allowed – Care Application after Abuse
Children had made allegations of serious sexual abuse against their step-father. He was acquitted at trial, but the local authority went ahead with care proceedings. The parents appealed against a finding that a likely risk to the children had still . .
Cited – Roberts v Bass 12-Dec-2002
Austlii (High Court of Australia) Defamation – Defences – Qualified privilege – State election – Publication of electoral material – Reciprocity of interest – Proof of malice – Improper motive – Whether intention . .
Cited – Binyan Mohamed, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs CA 26-Feb-2010
The claimant had sought public disclosure of documents supplied to the defendant by US security services which might support his claim that he had been tortured by the US, and that the defendant knew of it. The draft judgment was to be handed down . .
Cited – Bunt v Tilley and others QBD 10-Mar-2006
The claimant sought damages in defamation in respect of statements made on internet bulletin boards. He pursued the operators of the bulletin boards, and the court now considered the liability of the Internet Service Providers whose systems had . .

Cited by:

Cited – Monroe v Hopkins QBD 10-Mar-2017
The claimant, a transgender chef and food blogger claimed in defamation against the defendant journalist in respect of two tweets. The court now set out to decide the meanings, whether they were defamatory by nature, and whether the serious harm . .
Cited – Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd and Another SC 12-Jun-2019
Need to Show Damage Increased by 2013 Act
The claimant alleged defamation by three publishers. The articles were held to have defamatory meaning, but the papers argued that the defamations did not reach the threshold of seriousness in section 1(1) of the 2013 Act.
Held: The appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Torts – Other

Updated: 06 April 2022; Ref: scu.442198

Property Alliance Group Ltd v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc: CA 2 Mar 2018

The client sought damages against its former bankers as regards the misselling of interest rate swaps agreements dependant in part upon the dicredited LIBOR interest rates

Judges:

Sir Terence Etherton MR, Lord Justice Longmore and Lord Justice Newey

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 355

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Property Alliance Group Ltd v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc ChD 21-Dec-2016
Claim for alleged misselling of interest rate swap products. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Banking, Torts – Other

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.605696

Sapkota, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 13 Nov 2017

Claim for damages for false imprisonment, arising from the Defendant’s decisions to curtail the Claimant’s leave to remain and to detain him in immigration detention.

Judges:

Dinah Rose QC

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 2857 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other, Immigration

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.599419

Merelie v Newcastle Primary Care Trust: QBD 11 Nov 2004

An harassment claim was being considered. It was suggested that a defendant sought revenge against the claimant.

Judges:

Eady J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 2554 (QB).

Statutes:

Protection from Harassment Act 1997

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – Merelie v Newcastle Primary Care Trust QBD 21-Feb-2006
. .
See Also – Merelie v Newcastle Primary Care Trust QBD 20-Jun-2006
. .
See Also – Merelie v Newcastle Primary Health Care Trust and Others (No.3) Admn 20-Jun-2006
. .
See Also – Merelie v Newcastle Primary Care Trust CA 2-Mar-2007
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Torts – Other

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.238937

Coghlan v Chief Constable of Cheshire Police and Others: QBD 17 Jan 2018

The claimant had been demonstrated to be innocent of very serious charges brought against him, and sought a declaration alleging malicious prosecution. The defendants sought a strike out of the claim.

Judges:

Edward Pepperall QC DHCJ

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 34 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Torts – Other, Human Rights

Updated: 03 April 2022; Ref: scu.603725

GYH v Persons Unknown (Responsible for The Publication of Webpages): QBD 19 Dec 2017

Application without notice to the defendant for an interim non-disclosure order to restrain what she alleges is a campaign of harassment. The campaign consists mainly of the publication of various items or categories of personal information or purported information about the claimant. These include allegations that the claimant has HIV/AIDS, and other information or purported information about her sexual life, and her physical and mental health. It is the claimant’s case that the allegation that she has HIV/AIDS is false, as is some of the other information about her.

Judges:

Warby J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 3360 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Protection from Harassment Act 1997

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Media, Torts – Other

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.602138

TBS v Metropolitan Police Commissioner: QBD 4 Dec 2017

The claimant had been born of an activist mother and an undercover police officer. He now sought damages saying that the discovery of his true history had caused him mental ill health. The defendant now sought the strike out of the claim.

Judges:

Nicol J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 3094 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other

Updated: 02 April 2022; Ref: scu.601124

Scomadi Ltd and Another v RA Engineering Co Ltd and Others (Judgment): IPEC 27 Oct 2017

Claims and counterclaims covering breach of contract, trade mark infringement, passing off, Registered Community Design (‘RCD’) infringement, UK unregistered design right infringement, negligent misrepresentation, negligent misstatement, infringement of copyright, and rescission .

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 2658 (IPEC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Main Judgment – Scomadi Ltd and Another v RA Engineering Co Ltd and Others (Orders) IPEC 27-Oct-2017
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Contract, Torts – Other

Updated: 31 March 2022; Ref: scu.598318

Proctor v The Chief Constable of Cleveland Police: CA 12 Oct 2017

The claimant appealed against rejection of his allegations of torts associated with his arrest under the 2006 Act, but which had not led to any prosecution.

Judges:

Gross, Simon LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 1531

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Fraud Act 2006

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 30 March 2022; Ref: scu.596094

Garcia v Marex Financial Ltd: CA 26 Jun 2018

The claimant obtained judgment against the defendant company. Anticipating this the company owners were said to have stripped the company of its assets. They now resisted claims against themselves personally.

Judges:

Lewison, Lindblom, Flaux LJJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 1468, [2018] 3 WLR 1412, [2018] WLR(D) 395, [2019] QB 173, [2018] BPIR 1495

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other, Company

Updated: 30 March 2022; Ref: scu.618831

Kalma and Others v African Minerals Ltd and Others: QBD 29 Jan 2018

A threshold of seriousness was required before the court will undertake a balance of the competing interests to decide whether to make an order for anonymity.

Judges:

Mr Justice Turner

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 120 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Kalma and Others v African Minerals Ltd and Others QBD 14-Feb-2017
. .

Cited by:

Cited – XXX v Camden London Borough Council CA 11-Nov-2020
Anonymity in Court Proceedings – No two stage test
XXX appealed against the refusal to make orders anonymising her name and redacting certain details from published judgments. The appeal raised a point about the proper approach to applications for anonymisation under CPR 39.2. She brought . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Litigation Practice

Updated: 30 March 2022; Ref: scu.605792

Ilori, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 21 Dec 2017

The court was asked whether the Defendant acted lawfully in maintaining detention of the Claimant, a Nigerian national, in an Immigration Removal Centre following receipt of a report prepared under Rule 35 of the Detention Centre Rules 2001

Judges:

Leigh-Ann Mulcahy QC

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 3355 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Torts – Other

Updated: 30 March 2022; Ref: scu.602588

Ultraleisure Ltd v Stapleton and Others: ChD 21 Jan 2009

Ultraleisure Limited (‘the company’) acting by its liquidator seeks relief against two former directors in respect of alleged misappropriations in excess of pounds 3m.

Judges:

David Richards J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 67 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Company, Torts – Other

Updated: 30 March 2022; Ref: scu.594616

Hayes v Butters and Others: ChD 10 Dec 2014

The claimant had been made bankrupt, and sought an order against his trustee under the 1997 Act. The trustee now requested that the claim be struck out.
Held: The application was struck out, but the matter referred to the County Court for trial.

Judges:

Nugee J

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 4557 (Ch), [2015] BPIR 287, [2015] 2 WLR 1634

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Protection from Harassment Act 1997

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other

Updated: 29 March 2022; Ref: scu.550168

W v Meah: 1986

The defendant had attacked two women, one he raped and the other he seriously sexually assaulted. They both brought actions claiming damages for personal injuries. The woman who was raped was subjected to what was described by the trial judge as extremely obscene and terrifying behaviour, was then tied up whilst still naked and stabbed in the chest with a knife. She was taken to hospital where she remained for five days. Though she managed to make a complete physical recovery, she suffered psychological problems. The CICB had awarded her andpound;3,600.
Held: ‘That was without the Board having any medical reports of the sort that I have had, or indeed having, as I understand, the opportunity to hear Miss D give evidence as I have had. The board does not take into account aggravated damages. However, so far as aggravated damages are concerned, the award must be moderate, and the primary purpose of the damages must still remain to compensate the person concerned for the injuries they have suffered, although of course the circumstances in which the injuries are suffered does affect the amount of injury they are entitled to be compensated for’. He awarded andpound;10,250, stressing that the compensation extended to the effect of the circumstances in which the injury was suffered.

Judges:

Woolf J

Citations:

[1986] 1 All ER 935

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Richardson v Howie CA 13-Aug-2004
The claimant sought damages for assault. In the course of a tempestuous relationship, she said the respondent had physically assaulted her in Barbados. He was later convicted of soliciting her murder. She sought and was awarded aggravated damages, . .
Cited – Appleton and others v Garrett 1996
The plaintiffs were patients of the defendant dentist who had carried out unnecessary treatment on them; they claimed damages for trespass and sought aggravated damages.
Held: There was no reason in principle why awards of aggravated damages . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Torts – Other

Updated: 29 March 2022; Ref: scu.200253

National Coal Board v Gamble: QBD 1958

M drove a lorry used for carrying coal from the NCB quarries to power station. H was employed by the NCB to operate a weighbridge, providing tickets to drivers as to the weight on board, and aa a delivery note. On this occasion, the lorry was overloaded. H told M, but still ticketed the lorry and allowed him to drive away. NCB now appealed a conviction for aiding and abetting the offence by M.
Held: The appeal failed.
The court considered the necessary elements of an offence of aiding and abetting. Devlin J said: ‘If one man deliberately sells to another a gun to be used for murdering a third, he may be indifferent whether the third man lives or dies and interested only in the cash profit to be made out of the sale, but he can still be an aider and abetter.’ And ‘A person who supplies the instrument for a crime or anything essential to its commission aids in the commission of it; and if he does so knowingly and with intent to aid, he abets it as well and is therefore guilty of aiding and abetting.’
Aiding and abetting the commission of an offence could take place without the presence of the accused.
The intention required of an aider and abettor is an intention to assist or encourage the commission of a principal crime.
Devlin J pointed out that a consequence of rule that the law of tort does not recognise true accessory liability, only joint liability where the person who can be termed the actual perpetrator is the agent of another person, is that selling a person a gun knowing that person will use it to kill someone else will make the seller an accessory to the murder but will not in itself make him liable in tort.
Slade J said that mere passive acquiescence is sufficient only where the alleged aider and abettor has the power to control the offender and is actually present when the offence is committed, and continued: ‘Before a person can be convicted of aiding and abetting the commission of an offence the prosecution must prove: (a) that he knew the essential matters which constituted the offence . . and (b) that with such knowledge he assisted or at least encouraged the principal offender to commit the offence.’

Judges:

Slade, Devlin JJ

Citations:

[1958] 3 All ER 203, [1959] 42 CAR 240, [1959] 1 QB 11, (1958) 42 Cr App R 240, [1958] 3 WLR 434, (1958) 122 JP 453

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Bryce CACD 18-May-2004
The defendant said that his involvement in the murder of which he had been convicted had been secondary only. He was alleged to have transported the killer and the gun which he used to commit the murder to a caravan near the victim’s home so that . .
Cited – Jogee and Ruddock (Jamaica) v The Queen SC 18-Feb-2016
Joint Enterprise Murder
The two defendants appealed against their convictions (one in Jamaica) for murder, under the law of joint enterprise. Each had been an accessory when their accomplice killed a victim with a knife. The judge in Jogee had directed the jury that he . .
Cited – Fish and Fish Ltd v Sea Shepherd Uk and Others CA 16-May-2013
The claimant company sought damages after their transport of live tuna was attacked by a protest group. They now appealed against a decision that the company owning the attacking ship was not liable as a joint tortfeasor.
Held: The appeal was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Torts – Other

Updated: 29 March 2022; Ref: scu.190042

In re K (Children): CA 19 Feb 2019

Whether Her Honour Judge Edwards was wrong to conclude that the appellant father had sexually abused his 6-year-old daughter. The father contends that the evidence was inadequate to support the judge’s findings.

Citations:

[2019] EWCA Civ 184

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Torts – Other

Updated: 28 March 2022; Ref: scu.633440

Huntingdon Life Sciences Group Plc and Another v Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (Shac) and Others: QBD 16 Apr 2003

Application for an injunction by the first claimant, Huntingdon Life Sciences Group PLC and Huntingdon Life Sciences Limited and their managing director, the second claimant, who seeks relief both on his own behalf and on behalf of employees of the first claimant.
The first defendants Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty are an organisation whose express purpose it is to close down the first claimant’s business. The claimants seek relief against them and all their members and all protestors conducting activities against the claimants. The second and tenth defendants are individuals who can be demonstrated to have played an active role in the activities of SHAC against HLS, and indeed between them have acquired a number of convictions in the criminal courts as a result of that activity. The eleventh and twelfth defendants are organisations sharing the aim of SHAC and on the claimant’s case working with them towards the achievement of that aim.

Judges:

Pitchers J

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 1139 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other

Updated: 28 March 2022; Ref: scu.427047

Ernst and Young Llp and Others v Coomber and Another: QBD 8 Nov 2010

The claimants, Coomber, claimed in conspiracy, and the defendants claimed in defamation. Various applications were made. The claimants had promoted a development project, but their bankers went into administration. The bank being unable to promise further funds, required repayment of the sums already advanced, and in due course sold the property. The claimants alleged a conspiracy between the several professionals involved to deprive them of the property. The claimants’ first conspiracy claim was dismissed summarily as irrational and fantastical. The defendants issued proceedings for defamation after the claimant persisted in publishing their allegations on the web. The claimants said they wished to counterclaim for conspiracy, but then decided not to defend the defamation action.
Held: Judgment should be entered against the claimant on the defamation action despite differences as to the facts, and the interim injunction against republication should be continued. Judgment was also entered against them on the conspiracy claim.
Ample grounds had been shown for the making of a civil restraint order, and one was made accordingly.

Judges:

Eady J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 2837 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Defamation Act 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Downtex v Flatley CA 2-Oct-2003
The claimants sought damages for defamation and breach of contract. The claimants had purchased a business from the defendant, which contract included a clause requiring the defendant to say nothing damaging about the business. The defendant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Defamation, Litigation Practice

Updated: 28 March 2022; Ref: scu.425807

Richard v British Broadcasting Corporation and Another: ChD 26 May 2017

The court heard an application to read out a statement agreed between the claimant and first defendant, the terms of which were objected to by the BBC.
Held: A statement in the form drafted by the claimant with amendments suggested by the defendant was to be appended to the judgment and read out as required. Morse J set out the principles applicable: ‘(i) A party making a statement should not be allowed to abuse a privilege which attaches to a statement in open court and the publicity which it is doubtless intended to attract. Unfair statements about a third party or another defendant would be an example of an abuse.
(ii) The court must be live to the fact that a statement in open court is intended to attract publicity and ensure that fairness, or unfairness, to a third party or another defendant is viewed in that light.
(iii) It seems to me the parties are generally entitled to state their respective cases in such a statement and their respective admissions. A conceding party is entitled to express its objections in terms which it wishes to use, particularly if they have been agreed with the claimant as part of a settlement. If there are objections as between a third party or another party then that is very likely to be of little consequence.
(iv) Short of an apparent abuse, a statement should be allowed against the objections of a third party or another defendant unless it is sufficiently unfair to require the court to refuse to approve it.
(v) Causing prejudice to a fair trial involving others would be an obvious unfairness. However, unless the trial is a jury trial, it is hard to see how a statement in open court can prejudice that trial given that the trial judge can be expected to ignore such non-evidential material, even if that judge is aware of it. The Barnet case demonstrates that even if there is to be a jury trial the same may still apply.
(vi) Any unfairness which is relied on should be significant and the statement should not be disallowed because of what might be debatable and/or slightly unfair or nit-picking.
(vii) If the case of a non-settling party is referred to in the statement in open court by way of a proper summary, without setting out all the details, that is highly unlikely to be unfair. The case of a non-settling party, if referred to in the statement, does not have to be set out extensively.’

Judges:

Mann J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 1648 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Barnet v Crozier CA 1987
The court considered an application by a third party to proceedings to prevent a statement being read out in open court in defamation proceedings. Justification had originally been pleaded by both defendants but, as part of a settlement with the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Litigation Practice, Torts – Other

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.589939

Vilca and Others v Xstrata Ltd and Another: QBD 30 Jun 2017

The Claimants are 22 Peruvian nationals who claim damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained in the course of a protest at the Tintaya copper mine in May 2012.

Judges:

Stuart-Smith J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 1582 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Torts – Other

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.589916

The Secretary of State for Health and Another v Servier Laboratories Ltd and Others: CA 12 Jul 2019

Appeal against a paragraph of an order by which the judge struck out the claim of the appellant, the Secretary of State for Health and the NHS Business Services Authority that the third respondent is liable for interfering with the NHS’s economic interests by unlawful means.

Judges:

Sir Terence Etherton MR, Lord Justice Longmore and Lord Justice McCombe

Citations:

[2019] EWCA Civ 1160

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – The Secretary of State for Health and Another v Servier Laboratories Ltd and Others ChD 2-Aug-2017
Roth J struck out the unlawful means tort claim, saying that, in OBG ‘the ratio of Lord Hoffmann’s determination of the elements of the tort is in para 51’ of his speech: ‘Unlawful means therefore consists of acts intended to cause loss to the . .
See Also – The Secretary of State for Health and Another v Servier Laboratories Ltd and Others CA 27-Jun-2019
The Court was asked how far the EU law principle of res judicata can be relied on by the Appellants as establishing facts which they wish to prove in their defences to the damages claims brought by the Respondents. Servier submits that certain . .

Cited by:

See Also – The Secretary of State for Health and Another v Servier Laboratories Ltd and Others CA 12-Jul-2019
The SS said that the respondent had knowingly made false assertions in its defence of a patent. This had unlawfully maintained the patent, causing the appellant to pay more for associated drugs. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Torts – Other

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.648853

Ndole Assets Ltd v Designer M and E Services Uk Ltd: TCC 18 May 2017

The defendant sought a declaration that the Claim Form and the Particulars of Claim were not properly served, alternatively that the claim should be struck out because of invalid or ineffectual service. Further, Designer sought summary judgment against the claimant because the claim was brought by Ndole as assignees, and it was said that the circumstances of the assignments meant that the claim should be dismissed on grounds of maintenance/champerty.

Judges:

Coulson J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 1148 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Litigation Practice, Contract, Torts – Other

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.583983

Metall und Rohstoff AG v Donaldson Lufkin and Jenrette Inc and another: QBD 29 Mar 1988

The plaintiff had suffered damage when given negligent advice. It obtained a judgment but the company became insolvent, and it now sought to sue the US parent company in conspiracy. The defendant said that to establish conspiracy it was necessary that the dominant aim had been to cause injury or loss to the plaintiff.
Held: The defence failed. It was based on a misinterpretation of Lonhro.

Judges:

Gatehouse J

Citations:

[1990] QB 391

Links:

Gazette

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Lonrho Ltd v Shell Petroleum Co Ltd (No 2) HL 1-Apr-1981
No General Liability in Tort for Wrongful Acts
The plaintiff had previously constructed an oil supply pipeline from Beira to Mozambique. After Rhodesia declared unilateral independence, it became a criminal offence to supply to Rhodesia without a licence. The plaintiff ceased supply as required, . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Metal und Rohstoff AG v Donaldson Lufkin and Jenrette Inc CA 27-Jan-1989
The claimants sued for negligent advice and secured judgment. The defendant company became insolvent, and so the plaintiff now sued the US parent company alleging conspiracy. The court considered a tort of malicious prosecution of a civil claim, . .
Appeal from – Metall und Rohstoff AG v Donaldson Lufkin and Jenrette Inc CA 1990
There was a complicated commercial dispute involving allegations of conspiracy. A claim by the plaintiffs for inducing or procuring a breach of contract would have been statute-barred in New York.
Held: Slade LJ said: ‘The judge’s approach to . .
Cited – Morin v Bonhams and Brooks Limited Bonhams and Brooks S A M CA 18-Dec-2003
The claimant had bought a vintage Ferrari motor car through the defendant auctioneers in Monaco but sought rescission after it appeared that the odometer had been altered. The auction conditions purported to exclude any description of the car. He . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Jurisdiction

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.268056

Westminster City Council v Haw: QBD 4 Oct 2002

The court was asked as to the interaction between the right and the duty of a local authority to remove obstructions from its highways, on the one hand, and the right of the individual citizen to use those highways to exercise his or her right to freedom of expression, on the other hand. It is an application by Westminster City Council, which is the local authority responsible for the highways, including the pavements, in Parliament Square in London, to restrain Mr Brian Haw from obstructing the pavement opposite the House of Commons by displaying there a considerable number of placards supporting his protest against the policies of the Government in relation to Iraq.

Judges:

Gray J

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 2073 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Jones and Lloyd HL 4-Mar-1999
21 people protested peacefully on the verge of the A344, next to the perimeter fence at Stonehenge. Some carried banners saying ‘Never Again,’ ‘Stonehenge Campaign 10 years of Criminal Injustice’ and ‘Free Stonehenge.’ The officer in charge . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Torts – Other

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.426530

Adorian v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: QBD 19 May 2008

Claim for damages for assault during arrest. It became necessary for the claimant to issue proceedings very quickly after the decision in Hoare, and he failed to obtain consent under the 2003 Act before issuing his claim.
Held: The requirement to obtain consent before issuing proceedings was procedural only.

Judges:

Owen J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 1081 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 2003 329

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Adorian v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis CA 23-Jan-2009
The claimant received injuries when arrested. He was later convicted of resisting arrest. The defendant relied on section 329 of the 2003 Act. The claimant said that the force used against him was grossly disproportionate. The commissioner appealed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.268688

BJM v Eyre and Others: QBD 12 Nov 2010

The claimant (in respect of whom an anonymity order had been made) claimed damages against the four defendants for personal injuries and financial loss arising from sexual and physical abuse of the claimant which took place between 2001 and 2003. The court considered additional claims for aggravated damages.

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 2856 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – RAR v GGC QBD 10-Aug-2012
The claimant alleged that the defendant, her stepfather, had sexually and otherwise assaulted her when she was a child. He had pleaded guilty to one charge in 1978, and now said that the claim was out of time. The claimant sought the extension of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Torts – Other, Damages

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.425972

Hall (for and on Behalf of Himself, her Relatives, Friends and Employees and Tenants of Darley Oaks Farm), Hall, Hall, Hall, Hall, and Clamp: QBD 17 Mar 2005

Application for injunction and exclusion order against animal rights protesters.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Owen

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 372 (QB)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other, Litigation Practice

Updated: 25 March 2022; Ref: scu.224351

Akita Holdings Ltd v The Honourable Attorney General of The Turks and Caicos Islands: PC 27 Mar 2017

(Turks and Caicos Islands) This appeal concerns the remedies available against a knowing recipient of property acquired at an undervalue from the government by a minister acting in breach of his fiduciary duty.

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, Lord Kerr, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath

Citations:

[2017] UKPC 7, [2017] 2 WLR 1153, [2017] WLR(D) 216

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Torts – Other, Trusts

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581724

Kajuga, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 5 Apr 2017

Appeal from dismissal of application for a declaration that the claimant had been unlawfully detained by the UK immigration authorities between 10 November 2011 and 22 March 2012.

Judges:

McFarlane, Flaux LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 240

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other, Immigration

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581431

Inter Export Llc v Townley and Another: ChD 17 Mar 2017

Alleged failure by a company (‘NTL’) to pay the sum of US$1,203,099 to the claimant, a Ukrainian company, for a consignment of 1,028.29 metric tonnes of sunflower oil. The oil was delivered to a Ukrainian port, Berdyansk Commercial Port, by the claimant and then exported out of BCP by NTL. NTL was in the business of buying and selling commodities, principally sunflower seed oil and steel pipes. The claimant underwent an arbitration in Ukraine in respect of the cargo of oil against NTL, which is in liquidation, but now sues a director (the second defendant) and shareholders (both defendants) of NTL directly in fraud. The claimant says the first defendant is a shadow or de facto director of NTL.

Judges:

Proudman J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 530 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other, Contract

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581329

Newdigate v Auncel: 1794

In the king’s bench, in a bill of trespass laid in Middlesex, the defendant need not be charged to be in the custody of the marshal.

Citations:

[1794] EngR 1180, (1794) 2 Dy 118, (1794) 73 ER 259

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Torts – Other

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.370112

Faulkner, Regina (On the Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another: Admn 5 Jun 2009

The claimant had sought to challenge his continued detention in prison when his situation should have been reviewed but had not been. As a lifer he had served the time set in his tariff.
Held: The applicant was unlawfully at large and had not appeared. The claim was dismissed.

Judges:

Blair J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 1507 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

At First Instance – Faulkner, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another SC 1-May-2013
The applicants had each been given a life sentence, but having served the minimum term had been due to have the continued detention reviewed to establish whether or not continued detention was necessary for the protection of the pblic. It had not . .
Appeal from – Faulkner, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice The Parole Board CA 14-Dec-2010
The claimant sought damages saying that his detention in prison beyond the minimum period pending a review was unlawful when that review was delayed. He now appealed against dismissal of his claim when he had not appeared at court, being unlawfully . .
Appeal from – Faulkner, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice The Parole Board CA 29-Mar-2011
The court considered the approriate level of damages where the claimant’s detention had been wrongly extended through a failure to hold a timely review of his continued detention.
Held: A sum of andpound;10,000 was awarded. The court should . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Prisons, Torts – Other

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.347305

Euro-Diam Ltd v Bathurst: CA 1990

The illegality defence was invoked in response to a claim on a property insurance.
Held: The court noted the extension of the concept of ex turpi causa non oritur actio: ‘It applies if in all the circumstances it would be an affront to the public conscience to grant the Plaintiff the relief which he seeks because the court would thereby appear to assist or encourage the Plaintiff in his illegal conduct or to encourage others in similar acts.’ He expressed that principle at by saying that the test was whether ‘in all the circumstances it would be an affront to the public conscience to grant the plaintiff the relief which he seeks because the court would thereby appear to assist or encourage the plaintiff in his illegal conduct or to encourage others in similar acts.’ That question needed to be approached ‘pragmatically and with caution, depending on the circumstances.’

Judges:

Kerr LJ

Citations:

[1990] 1 QB 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – J v S T (Formerly J) CA 21-Nov-1996
The parties had married, but the male partner was a transsexual, having been born female and having undergone treatment for Gender Identity Dysphoria. After IVF treatment, the couple had a child. As the marriage broke down the truth was revealed in . .
Cited – Les Laboratoires Servier and Another v Apotex Inc and Others SC 29-Oct-2014
Ex turpi causa explained
The parties had disputed the validity a patent and the production of infringing preparations. The english patent had failed and damages were to be awarded, but a Canadian patent remained the defendant now challenged the calculation of damages for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Torts – Other

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.235293

Phillips v Britannia Hygienic Laundry Co Ltd: CA 1923

A breach of the regulation does not give rise to an action for damages. The distinction between misfeasance and non-feasance should no longer have significance. Atkin LJ said: ‘one who cannot be otherwise specified than as a person using the highway’ met the requirement of being a road user. The regulations required a motor car and all its fittings to be ‘in such a condition as not to cause, or be likely to cause, danger to any person on the motor car or on any highway’.

Judges:

Atkin LJ

Citations:

[1923] 2 KB 832

Statutes:

Motor Cars (Use and Construction) Order 1904

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Exel Logistics Ltd v Curran and others CA 30-Sep-2004
The claimants sought damages for personal injuries after a crash in a Land Rover maintained by the defendants. The defendants appealed findings of negligence in failing properly to inflate the rear tyres, in continuing despite the danger, and poor . .
Cited – Bermuda Cablevision Limited and others v Colica Trust Company Limited PC 6-Oct-1997
(Bermuda) An alternative remedy to winding up is available to a shareholder where oppressive conduct is alleged, though the main thrust is that the conduct is unlawful. . .
Cited – Morrison Sports Ltd and Others v Scottish Power SC 28-Jul-2010
A fire caused substantial damage to buildings. It arose from a ‘shim’ placed in a fuse box which then overheated. The parties disputed whose employee had inserted the shim. The Act under which the Regulations had been made was repealed and replaced . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.199960

Scammel and Nephew Ltd v Hurley: CA 1929

The court considered when a public authority may lose any statutory protection for its acts.
Scrutton LJ said: ‘if illegal acts are really done from some motive other than an honest desire to execute the statutory or other legal duty and an honest belief that they are justified by statutory or other legal authority; if they are done from a desire to injure a person or to assist some person or cause, without any honest belief that they are covered by statutory authority, or are necessary in the execution of statutory duty, the Public Authorities Protection Act is no defence, for the acts complained of are not done in intended exercise of a statute, but only in pretended execution thereof.’

Judges:

Scrutton LJ

Citations:

[1929] 1 KB 419

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Harracksingh v The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago and PC Neville Adams PC 15-Jan-2004
(Trinidad and Tobago) The appellant had succeeded in a claim for damages against the police for false imprisonment and assault. He now appealed a reversal of that decision. The judge had been doubtful as to the value of the police evidence. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.193793