Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Administrative - From: 2000 To: 2000

This page lists 58 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.

 
Regina v Local Authority and Police Authority in the Midlands, ex parte LM [2000] 1 FLR 612
2000

Dyson J
Administrative
The court considered the retention of information about an unsubstantiated child sexual abuse allegation.
Police Act 1997 115(7)
1 Citers


 
Village Residents' Association Ltd v An Bord Pleanala (No 2) [2000] 4 IR 321
2000

Laffoy J
International, Costs, Administrative
(Irish High Court) The court faced the first application for a Protective Costs Order (PCO) in the High Court of Ireland. Held: There was jurisdiction to make such an order, but it was difficult in the abstract to identify the type or types of cases in which the interests of justice would require the court to deal with costs in the manner indicated by a PCO and it would be unwise to attempt to do so. The principles in ex p CPAG seemed to meet the fundamental rubric that the interests of justice should require a PCO to be made. An order was not made in this case.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Condon v Commissioner of Taxation [2000] FCA 1291
2000


Commonwealth, Administrative
(Federal Court of Australia) The idea of "disclosure" of something to a person who already knew or was deemed to know was conceptually impossible.
1 Citers


 
ex parte Wilkins CO 4676/2000
2000

Moses J
Administrative
The rules requiring consistency of decisions does not require a decision-maker to repeat what he sees to be a past error.
1 Citers


 
Marks and Spencer Plc v Commissioners of Customs and Excise Times, 19 January 2000
19 Jan 2000
CA

European, Administrative, VAT
The doctrine of direct effect which gave rise for a private individual against a member state could only operate where the member failed to comply with the requirements of European Law to give effect to such law, and the requirement to put such rules into effect had to be unconditional and precise. A party could not use the doctrine to claim against a member state under European Law in general.
1 Cites

1 Citers



 
 Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Quaquah; QBD 20-Jan-2000 - Gazette, 20 January 2000; Times, 21 January 2000

 
 Regina, Ex Parte Spath Holme Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and The Regions, Secretary of State For Wales; CA 20-Jan-2000 - Times, 15 February 2000
 
Bache v Essex County Council Times, 02 February 2000; Gazette, 03 February 2000; [2000] EWCA Civ 3
21 Jan 2000
CA

Employment, Administrative
An Employment Tribunal did not have the right to refuse to hear a representative selected by a party appearing before it. Where that representative was a member of a professional body, then the tribunal might exercise some discipline by referring misconduct to a regulatory body, but the right for the party to choose his representative was simply stated and absolute. The tribunal could not require him to represent himself.
[ Bailii ]
 
Ball v Secretary of Satte for the Environment Transport and the Regions and Another Gazette, 27 January 2000
27 Jan 2000
QBD

Planning, Natural Justice, Administrative
The applicant had appealed against an enforcement notice saying that the four year rule applied. The inspector issued his decision after the expiry of a time limit, but after the applicant had requested a further short period in which to make representations. It was held to be unfair to have proceeded without allowing more than a week for representations. B had suffered substantial prejudice for the failure to allow him to make such representations, and the decision was set aside.

 
Regina v Secretary of State ex parte Turgat Unreported, 28 January 2000
28 Jan 2000
CA
Simon Brown LJ
Administrative, Immigration, Human Rights


 
Regina v Tandbridge District Council and Another, Ex Parte Al-Fayed Times, 01 February 2000
1 Feb 2000
CA

Personal Injury, Administrative, Planning
A planning authority disallowed an objection to the erection of a mobile telephone transmitter. Although there had been an omission in the procedure followed by the council, it was clear that it had in fact considered the evidence put forward by the objector, and had made its decision in the light of that evidence. Objectively unjustified fears in a local community might be taken into account, but in this case they should not.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Interporc Im- Und Export Gmbh v Commission of the European Communities Case T-92/98 Times, 02 February 2000
2 Feb 2000
ECFI

Administrative
The commission was entitled to claim legal privilege against disclosure of documents only as regards documents which were prepared solely for the purpose of the court proceedings, and other documents which came into existence independently of such proceedings must be disclosed. The Code of Conduct which purported to allow documents to be withheld in the public interest was ineffective to prevent such access.


 
 Regina v Secretary of State for Health, ex parte C; CA 21-Feb-2000 - Gazette, 09 March 2000; Times, 01 March 2000; [2000] EWCA Civ 49
 
Van der Wal (supported by Kingdom of the Netherlands, Intervener) v Commission of the European Communities Joined Cases C-174/98P and C-189/98P Times, 22 February 2000
22 Feb 2000
CA

European, Administrative
When a national court sought assistance from the European Commission by way of opinions in deciding proceedings before that national court, the advice given was not to be held confidential from third parties simply on the basis that it was prepared for legal proceedings. Instead it had to ask the requesting court to state whether or not disclosure would breach national law. The public interest exemption from disclosure was not so wide or simple.

 
Emesa Sugar (Free Zone) Nv v Aruba Case C-17/98 Times, 29 February 2000
29 Feb 2000
ECJ

European, Administrative, Human Rights
It was not open to a party to a case before the European Court of Justice to seek opportunity to make written representations on opinions submitted to the Court by the Advocate General. Opinions of the Court of Human Rights that a party should have opportunity to see and comment upon all matters put before a tribunal were not applicable in this case. The role of the Advocates General was not to act in a partisan manner, and their views were given in a quasi-judicial capacity.

 
Clancy v Caird Times, 09 May 2000; [2000] ScotCS 96
4 Apr 2000
IHCS
Lord Sutherland and Lord Coulsfield and Lord Penrose
Administrative, Human Rights, Scotland
A temporary judge could hear civil cases where the state was not a party to the action without infringing the convention right to a fair trial. Rights are not to be seen as abstractions, the question related to the manner in which they affected the applicant. The appointment of the judge for three years was short, but was not terminable during its currency, and the judge enjoyed the status and immunities of a permanent judge within the normal judicial system.
Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1990 35(3)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ]
 
Wakelin and others v Read and another Times, 10 April 2000; [2000] EWCA Civ 82; [2000] PLR 319; [2000] OPLR 277
10 Apr 2000
CA

Financial Services, Administrative
The Pensions Ombudsman did not have the right to exercise his discretion to provide a different answer to the one which would be given by a court. This followed from the right given to parties to appeal against his decisions to the High Court on a point of law. The wide discretion given by the statute did not include a power to act otherwise than in accordance with the law.
The Pensions Ombudsman did not have the right to exercise his discretion to provide a different answer to the one which would be given by a court. This followed from the right given to parties to appeal against his decisions to the High Court on a point of law. The wide discretion given by the statute did not include a power to act otherwise than in accordance with the law. The court had to consider the range of the ombudsman's powers, including whether these exceeded those of the court. Held: A point was been raised by the Trustees on the width of the Ombudsman’s discretion to give directions under s 151(2) of the 1993 Act. Mr Simmonds QC sought on behalf of the Trustees to uphold the decision of the Ombudsman to decline to direct the Trustees to pay the benefits on the ground that Mr Read did not come with clean hands. He submitted that the sub-section confers the widest possible discretion both as to the nature of the remedy granted and as to whether he should grant any remedy at all. He was not limited to those courses of action which would be open to a court in litigation. I am unable to accept this submission. "
Pension Schemes Act 1993 151 (2)
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Commissioners of Customs and Excise, Ex Parte F and I Services Ltd Times, 26 April 2000; Gazette, 25 May 2000; [2002] HC Admin 327
14 Apr 2000
Admn
Lord Justice Robert Walker, Lord Justice Sedley And Mr Justice Lightman
Negligence, Customs and Excise, Estoppel, Administrative
The Commissioners gave advice to a tax payer, upon which the taxpayer relied, but the advice was incorrect. The law under which public authorities can be held responsible in negligence for the exercise of statutory functions is rapidly developing, and it is not possible to say that a claim against the Commissioners could not succeed.
[ Bailii ]
 
Kuijer v Council of the European Union Case T-188/98 Times, 14 April 2000
14 Apr 2000
ECJ

European, Immigration, Administrative
An applicant sought access to documents of the Council of the European Union relating to asylum. The decision of the Council to refuse access to the documents was on the grounds that the material was politically sensitive, and disclosure would be against the public interest. The council failed however to consider the status of the separate documents separately, and so the decision was invalid. The default position was that Council documents should be made available, and the ability to withhold related to individual documents.
Council Decision 93/731/EC on Public Access to Council documents

 
Robinson v Commissioners of Customs and Excise Times, 28 April 2000
28 Apr 2000
QBD

Administrative, Contract, Customs and Excise
Customs offered a reward for information, but the offer was clearly not a certainty, and there had been no intention to create a contractual or legal relationship. The informant had been clearly told that the decision as to the award would not be made by the officer, but by his superior in that officer's discretion, and therefore no legal binding offer to make payment had been made.

 
Regina v Secretary of the Central Office of the Employment Tribunals (England and Wales), ex parte Public Concern at Work Times, 09 May 2000
9 May 2000
QBD

Employment, Administrative
The Central Office of Tribunals must record the particulars of Employment Tribunal decisions. It has in the past recorded the existence of the application but no details. The court held that the register must include details of the parties, the particulars of the allegations made, and the full text of the decision where recorded. The word 'particulars' has a clear meaning to lawyers which would include such details, and other provisions presumed that such details were provided.
Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 1996 1757


 
 Berkeley v Secretary of State For The Environment and Others; HL 11-May-2000 - Times, 07 July 2000; [2000] 3 WLR 420; [2001] 2 AC 603; [2000] UKHL 36; [2000] 3 All ER 897

 
 Regina v Video Appeals Committee of British Board of Film Classification (ex parte British Board of Film Classification); Admn 16-May-2000 - Times, 07 June 2000; [2000] EWHC Admin 341

 
 Steed v Secretary of State for the Home Department; HL 26-May-2000 - Times, 26 May 2000; Gazette, 08 June 2000; [2000] UKHL 32; [2000] 3 All ER 226; [2000] 1 WLR 1169
 
Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions, ex parte Rochford District Council Times, 31 May 2000
31 May 2000
QBD

Planning, Administrative
A council had failed to fulfil its obligation to update and republish its local plan. The applicant had sought permission to develop a block of flats, but the council failed to determine the application. He appealed to the inspector who also awarded him a contribution to his costs on the basis that there was no proper reason for state of the council's plan, and because of an error in the application of a policy. On appeal it as held that though the faults pre-dated the application, that was clearly provided for in Circular 8/93


 
 Three Rivers District Council and Others v Governor and Company of The Bank of England; HL 8-Jun-2000 - Gazette, 08 June 2000; [2000] UKHL 331; [2000] 2 WLR 1220; [2000] 3 All ER 1
 
Regina v Director General of Electricity Supply, Ex Parte London Electricity Plc Times, 13 June 2000
13 Jun 2000
QBD

Administrative, Judicial Review
Where the cost of upgrading supply systems in order to support large numbers of newly installed night storage systems fell to be apportioned, the test as to who should bear the burden was according to causation. An increase under twenty five per cent would not have occasioned a charge, and individually no one supply exceeded that amount, but the Director must look to the whole scheme. For one identifiable scheme it was unrealistic to break it back down into individual increments in demand.


 
 Regina v Westminster City Council, Ex Parte Union of Managerial and Professional Officers and Others; QBD 13-Jun-2000 - Times, 13 June 2000

 
 Commissioners of Customs and Excise v Ray; ChD 14-Jun-2000 - Times, 14 June 2000; Gazette, 22 June 2000
 
Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions, Ex Parte Wheeler Gazette, 29 June 2000; Gazette, 20 July 2000; Times, 04 August 2000
29 Jun 2000
QBD

Land, Administrative
The minister decided that upon land which had been compulsorily purchased, but which was no longer needed being sold, it should not first be offered back to the original owners. The owner complained that the decision was in breach of the rules, which required such an offer unless it was a very exceptional case with strong and urgent reasons of public interest. They argued that this required a risk to life or limb. This was too close a definition. For such a decision to be intrinsically perverse, it had to defy comprehension. In this case, the secretary had asked himself the right questions, and the challenge failed.
Crichel Down Rules 1992

 
Mapere, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2000] EWHC 633 (Admin); [2001] Imm AR 89
3 Jul 2000
Admn
Sulivan J
Immigration, Administrative
To establish a legitimate expectation, the assurances relied on should be assurances that have been given by the decision-maker: "it would be wrong in principle for courts to rule that a decision-maker's discretion should be limited by an assurance given by some other person".
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Practice Direction (Administrative Court Establishment) Times, 27 July 2000
27 Jul 2000
QBD

Administrative, Litigation Practice
The direction establishes the Administrative Court as a successor to the Crown Office List. Existing orders and directions applying to the List should be renamed. A lead nominated judge would take responsibility for the speed efficiency and economy of the conduct of the court's business. New rules for judicial review will also be implemented to accompany the introduction of the Human Rights Act.

 
Brooks v Civil Aviation Authority and Another Times, 28 July 2000
28 Jul 2000
IHCS

Financial Services, Administrative, Scotland
When the Pensions Ombudsman carried out an investigation under the Act, he was entitled to act on the information already gathered, and had no obligation to undertake a new factual enquiry. The issues in this case had been litigated repeatedly, and the ombudsman had a wide discretion as to the conduct of his investigation of the complaint, and in this case his decision could not be faulted.


 
 Regina v Lands Tribunal, Ex Parte Jafton Properties Ltd; COL 31-Jul-2000 - Gazette, 31 August 2000; [2000] EWHC Admin 384
 
Mayne and Another v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Times, 12 October 2000; Gazette, 03 August 2000; [2001] EHLR 5
3 Aug 2000
QBD
Kennedy LJ and Jackson
Administrative, Crime, European, Agriculture
The defendants exported beef without the requisite certificates. The UK rules had been made before a Directive came into effect. On appeal after conviction the defendant argued that the rules purported to take account of future amendments. It was held that for a criminal sanction to be applicable, Regulations could not give effect to directives made by a third party without appropriate and explicit incorporation of those amendments. A regulation imposing sanctions for failure to comply with an EC Directive is not to be read as applying to future amendments to the Directive unless the wording of the regulations is such as clearly to take account of the possibility of future amendments.
1 Citers


 
Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment, Ex Parte National Union of Teachers Times, 08 August 2000
8 Aug 2000
QBD

Education, Employment, Administrative
The general power of the Secretary of State to promote education did not extend to provision for the terms and conditions of teachers' employment or establishing systems for the payment of higher rates of pay to teachers meeting performance standards. Reference to Parliament was necessary. The Secretary of State had not followed consultation procedures set down for the making of significant alterations to teachers contracts.
School Teachers' Pay and Conditions Act 1991


 
 Regina v Secretary of State for Health, Ex Parte Wagstaff etc; QBD 31-Aug-2000 - Times, 31 August 2000; Gazette, 28 September 2000; [2001] 1 WLR 292

 
 Regina v The National Lottery Commission ex parte Camelot Group Plc; Admn 21-Sep-2000 - Times, 12 October 2000; [2001] EMLR 3; [2000] EWHC Admin 391
 
Attorney-General v Covey Unreported, 6 October 2000
6 Oct 2000
QBD
Lord Justice Rose
Administrative, Human Rights
In an application for a vexatious litigant order, the court asked whether the repetitious proceedings must be against the same defendant. Lord Justice Rose: "The question is whether it is a necessary prerequisite for the making of an order under section 42 that the repetitious behaviour of which complaint is made has necessarily either to be directed against the same defendant or to arise from the same subject matter.
In my judgment, that is not the position. Granted that repetitious conduct is a necessary prerequisite for the making of an order, what gives rise to that repetitiveness necessarily depends, it seems to me, on the circumstances of the particular case. In making the determination whether or not there is that necessary element of repetition one looks at the whole history of the defendant's litigious activity. In some cases that activity will focus upon a particular defendant. In some cases it will focus upon a particular grievance. In some cases it may be represented by numerous claims against a wide range of defendants in circumstances where no reasonable cause of action exists. In this last category of case, it seems to me, the conditions of section 42 may be fulfilled just as they may be if a particular defendant or a particular grievance is the focus of the defendant's activity. As the passages in the judgment in Vernazza to which I earlier referred, make plain, one has to look at the whole of the circumstances, the way in which the proceedings were instituted, whether with or without reasonable cause, and also the way in which subsequently they were conducted by way of hopeless appeal or otherwise. All of those matters have to be considered."
Supreme Court Act 1981 42(1)
1 Citers


 
Dr Gnanapragasam Anton Joseph Selvanathan v The General Medical Council Times, 26 October 2000; (Appeal No 21 of 2000; [2000] UKPC 37
11 Oct 2000
PC

Administrative, Health Professions
Decisions of the Professional Conduct Committee of the GMC should now be accompanied by explanations. Earlier practice of issuing a bare decision had been superseded by general practice in decision making bodies, and also by detailed rules governing the practice of the committee. Fairness required reasons to be given so that the disciplined doctor could make an informed decision on whether to appeal.
General Medical Council Preliminary Proceedings and Professional Conduct Committee (Procedure) Rules 1988 Order in Council 1988/2255 - Medical Act 1983
[ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ]

 
 Regina v Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority, Ex Parte Leatherland; similar; QBD 12-Oct-2000 - Times, 12 October 2000; [2001] ACD 76
 
Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment, Ex Parte Amraf Training Plc Times, 17 October 2000
17 Oct 2000
QBD

Education, Administrative
Although the department had registered a course for an eighty per cent subsidy for trainees, in the absence of knowledge of what fees would be charged, it remained open to the department later to withdraw that recognition when the amounts payable appeared not to represent value for money, and even though students had been accepted onto the course. The existing students had been allowed to complete the course, and the provider offered the opportunity to apply to re-register at a lower course fee, but had refused. Value for money was a relevant factor.

 
Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Ullah Times, 17 October 2000
17 Oct 2000
QBD

Immigration, Administrative
The fact that a claimant had acquired British citizenship in one way did not take away his right in addition to apply for naturalisation arising from his rights by descent. The latter process would create additional rights for his own children, and he had the right to apply. There was nothing in the legislation to suggest that the two alternatives were mutually exclusive, and the Home Office's practice to the contrary was unlawful.
British Nationality Act 1981 6

 
Tt's Corporation Law Ltd v Commission of the European Communities Case Times, 18 October 2000; T-123/99
18 Oct 2000
ECJ

European, Administrative
The Community's general policy of openness must override a Community regulation which imposed severe secrecy restrictions. A regulation was used as a basis to refuse to give to a litigant in England information about relevant mission reports of the EU concerning trade. The general principle was set down with certain exceptions, and could not be set aside for this purpose. In any event the regulation under which access had been refused did not apply to this situation.

 
Regina v Independent Television Commission, Ex Parte TVDanmark 1 Ltd Gazette, 26 October 2000; Times, 25 October 2000; [2001] 1 WLR 74
25 Oct 2000
CA

Media, Administrative, European
The ITC did not have power to refuse to consider a renewed application for permission by a British broadcasting company to exercise its exclusive rights to televise matches of the Danish National football team in a forthcoming tournament as against a Danish public service broadcaster who would reach a greater proportion of the Danish population. Attempts to bring such events to a wider audience were properly exercised at the time of the grant of the rights, but not later after they had been granted.
Television Broadasting transmitted across Frontiers Directive 1989/55/EEC - Broadcasting Act 1996

 
Regina v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry ex parte Orange Personal Communications Ltd and Another Times, 15 November 2000; Gazette, 23 November 2000
25 Oct 2000
Admn

Administrative, Media, Licensing, Constitutional
Once rights by way of licences had been granted to a party by virtue of a statute, an amendment to those licences required the Secretary to be explicit with Parliament when altering the licences. The Act provided clear rules for making amendments to licences. The Secretary purported to amend the licences to comply with a European Directive, but the new regulations did not specifically disapply the regime for amending the licences. He should have made it clear in the statutory instrument that the protections were being removed. The regulations made under section 2(2) of the 1972 Act which, if valid, took away valuable rights of Orange which they had enjoyed under the Telecommunications Act 1984, were ultra vires, on the ground that the regulations had failed explicitly to state that rights enjoyed under primary legislation were being taken away.
Telecommunications Act 1984 12 13 14 15 - Telecommunications (Licence Modification) (Standard Schedules) Regulations 1999 (1999 no 2540) - European Communities Act 1972 2(2)
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Commissioners for Customs and Excise ex parte Building Societies Ombudsman Company Limited [2000] EWCA Civ 270
26 Oct 2000
CA

Administrative

[ Bailii ]

 
 Regina v Manchester Crown Court, ex parte McCann and others; QBD 22-Nov-2000 - Gazette, 11 January 2001; Times, 22 December 2000; [2002] 3 WLR 1313; [2000] EWHC 565 (QB)
 
Care First Partnership Ltd v Roffey and Others Times, 22 November 2000; Gazette, 23 November 2000; [2001] IRLR 85
22 Nov 2000
CA
Aldous LJ, Sir Christopher Slade
Administrative, Employment
An employment tribunal had no power to dismiss a claim as without a reasonable prospect of success before it was begun to be heard. The power to regulate its own hearings did not include such a power, and the power to dismiss a claim as frivolous or vexatious, or for failure to comply with directions applied different standards, and gave differing protections. At the 'no reasonable prospect of success' level, the tribunal had powers to require a deposit and to give warnings as to liability for costs, but no more. The case management powers were procedural and gave no strike out jurisdiction.
Aldous LJ said: "The jurisdiction of the tribunal is governed by the Rules. They, when read, indicate that a strike-out can only happen at the preliminary stage or during the hearing of the case under rule 13(2) which entitles the tribunal to strike out any application on the grounds that it is scandalous, frivolous or vexatious. The standard set by that rule is that which was applied in Order 18, rule 19 of the Rules of the Supreme Court, namely that the application was bound to fail. The lesser standard of proof which is sought to be prayed in aid in this case [no reasonable prospect of success] is contrary to the expressed intention of the Rules. In my view, it would be odd to strike out a claim before completion of the applicants' evidence because it appeared to have no reasonable chance of success, unless the Rules specifically so provided." and
"To incorporate the powers given in Part 3.4 of the Civil Procedure Rules would, in my view, be contrary to the intention of the Employment Tribunal Rules. They were brought into existence in 1993, before the CPR was conceived. They set out a system for removing hopeless cases. Prior to the hearing the rules enable the tribunal to require a deposit and give a warning as to costs if a case has no reasonable prospect of success. At any time the case can be struck out if it is scandalous, frivolous or vexatious. By the time of the hearing, witness statements may have been exchanged, but the nature of a case does not change during the time immediately before the hearing to when it actually starts. If the tribunal had no power to strike out a case prior to the hearing because it had no reasonable prospect of success, absent express provision, it would appear to me to be contrary to the intention of the Rules that such a power should exist at the beginning of the hearing before evidence has been heard."
Sir Christopher Slade said: "I would, for my part, accept that such jurisdiction may indeed be desirable in cases where the application is as a matter of law on any footing bound to fail. But at least in many such cases any such application will, by its very nature, be `vexatious' within rule 13(2)(d) of the 1993 Rules, so that in such cases the jurisdiction to strike out will be conferred by that rule. Rule 13(2)(d) has not been invoked by the appellant on this appeal for obvious reasons."
Employment Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 1996 (1996 No 1757) 4(7) 7 9(1) 9(2) 13(1) 13(2)
1 Citers


 
Bellinger v Bellinger Times, 22 November 2000; [2001] 1 FLR 389
22 Nov 2000
FD
Johnson J
Family, Administrative
The test for what sex somebody was for the purposes of validating a marriage was the sex as decided and set out on the birth registration certificate. Though increasing recognition has been given to the complexities of gender identity over the years, this was an area which, if it was to be reformed, must be reformed by parliament and as a comprehensive whole, not piecemeal by judges. Johnson J said: "There is now a distinct possibility that were it possible to do so, examination of the brain of a living individual would reveal further indications of gender. But that is not yet possible and the practical reality is that whatever may ultimately emerge from advances in medical science, the only criteria for determining the gender of an individual remain those identified in Corbett."
Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 11
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Mario Montana Times, 05 December 2000; Gazette, 11 January 2001; [2000] EWHC Admin 421
23 Nov 2000
Admn

Administrative, Human Rights, Discrimination, Children
The distinction made in British nationality law, between the relationships of mother and child, and that of father and child, when the parents were not married, was not a breach of the human right to a family life. The claimant suggested that the rule was discriminatory both as sex discrimination, and as discrimination against the child as illegitimate. In this case the refusal of British citizenship had not in fact interfered with the child's family relationships, and there was no previous case in which such a distinction had been found. The cases for citizenship under the two sections were quite different, and were not proper comparators.
British Nationality Act 1981 2 3
[ Bailii ]
 
Regina on Application of Channel Tunnel Group Ltd and France-Manche S A v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and Regions [2000] EWHC Admin 425
30 Nov 2000
Admn

Administrative

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Tawfick Times, 05 December 2000; Gazette, 11 January 2001
5 Dec 2000
QBD

Administrative, Criminal Practice
The applicant had been convicted and imprisoned following a trial in which he had defended himself, and in which the judge had attacked his honesty before the jury, and his honesty was an issue in the charge. The conviction had been set aside, and he sought compensation the Secretary of State who had refused this on the grounds that the circumstances were not exceptional. Held: The Secretary of State's decision was irrational. The complaint went to behaviour of the judge, and was justified. The Secretary of State's decision was outside the range of reasonable responses, and he should have granted the application.


 
 Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Mahmood; CA 8-Dec-2000 - Times, 09 January 2001; [2001] 1 WLR 840; [2000] All ER (D) 2191; [2000] EWCA Civ 315; [2001] HRLR 14; [2001] Fam Law 257; [2001] Imm AR 229; [2001] 1 FLR 756; [2001] UKHRR 307; (2001) 3 LGLR 23; [2001] ACD 38; [2001] 2 FCR 63; [2001] INLR 1
 
Regina (Conlon) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Unreported, 11 December 2000
11 Dec 2000

Thomas J
Administrative

1 Citers


 
DA Botany Bay City Council v Remath Investments (2000) 111 LGERA 446; (2000) 50 NSWLR 312; [2000] NSWCA 364
15 Dec 2000

Stein JA, Fitzgerald JA
Commonwealth, administrative
(Supreme Court of New South Wales - Court of Appeal) A statute provided that "A development application shall . . (b) be made in the prescribed form and manner;…and (d) . . be accompanied by an environmental impact statement in the prescribed form". The application and the environmental impact statement were both submitted, but not at the same time. Held. "substantial compliance" with the statutory provisions would be satisfied even where the statement is lodged later than the application itself.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Michael Alexander Watson v British Boxing Board of Control Ltd, World Boxing Organisation Incorporated Gazette, 22 March 2001; Times, 02 February 2001; [2000] EWCA Civ 2116; [2001] QB 1134; [2001] PIQR 16
19 Dec 2000
CA
Lord Phillips MR
Administrative, Personal Injury, Negligence
The claimant was seriously injured in a professional boxing match governed by rules established by the defendant's rules. Ringside medical facilities were available, but did not provide immediate resuscitation. By the time he received resuscitation in hospital he had sustained permanent brain damage which such treatment would have prevented. Held: A body which had responsibility for licensing and setting conditions for the boxing matches was liable in negligence when, having assumed responsibility for the boxer's medical care, the standards it set were inadequate. The setting of rules could be akin to the giving of advice and thus had an indirect influence on the occurrence of the injury. Had the Board said nothing, it might not be liable, but once it gave advice by setting rules, it came to be responsible. If it had in place the appropriate protocols for provision of medical care, the claimant's injuries would not have been so severe. "It seems to me that the authorities support a principle that, where A places himself in a relationship to B in which B’s physical safety becomes dependant upon the acts and omissions of A, A’s conduct can suffice to impose on A a duty to exercise reasonable care for B’s safety." and "Had the board simply given advice to all involved in professional boxing as to appropriate medical precautions, it would be strongly arguable that there was insufficient proximity between the board and individual boxers to give rise to a duty of care. The board, however, went far beyond this. It made provision in its rules for the medical precautions to be employed and made compliance with these rules mandatory."
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]

 
 Kadhim v Housing Benefit Board, London Borough of Brent; CA 20-Dec-2000 - Times, 27 March 2001; [2000] EWCA Civ 344; [2001] 2 WLR 1674; [2001] QB 955
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.