

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. Â
		Commonwealth - From: 1960 To: 1969 This page lists 410 cases, and was prepared on 20 May 2019. Â Watson v Ramsay (1960) 78 WN (NSW) 64 1960 Brereton J Commonwealth, Damages (New South Wales) The right to have a pension or the chance of having a pension from his employer is part of what a servant earns by his labour. The distinction is not valid. 1 Citers Â Commissioner for Railways (NSW ) v Cardy [1960] HCA 45; (1960) 104 CLR 274; [1961] ALR 16 1960 Commonwealth 1 Citers Â Â Truth (NZ) Ltd v Holloway; PC 1960 - [1960] 1 WLR 997 Â Regina v George (1960) 128 Can CC 289 1960 Fauteux J Commonwealth, Crime (Canada) Fauteux J described the difference between a crime of basic intent and one of specific intent: "In considering the question of mens rea, a distinction is to be made between (i) intention as applied to acts considered in relation to their purposes and (ii) intention as applied to acts apart from their purposes. A general intent attending the commission of an act is, in some cases, the only intent required to constitute the crime while, in others, there must be, in addition to that general intent, a specific intent attending the purpose for the commission of the act." 1 Citers Â Â John De Freitas v The Queen; 1960 - [1960] 2 WIR 523 Â Fawcett v Star Car Sales Limited [1960] NZLR 406 1960 Gresson P Contract, Commonwealth (New Zealand) "a void contract is a paradox; in truth there is no contract at all." and 'the difficulty in deciding whether a mistake of identity prevents the formation of a concluded contract is a proper assessment of the facts rather than the ascertainment of the law'. 1 Citers Â The Official Assignee of The Property of Koh Hor Khoon and Others, Bankrupts v Ek Liong Hin Limited (Singapore) [1960] UKPC 1 14 Jan 1960 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Â Edward Ramia Limited v African Woods Limited; PC 19-Jan-1960 - [1960] UKPC 3 Â Khatijabai Jawa Hasham v Zenab D/O Chandu Nansi (Eastern Africa) [1960] UKPC 2 19 Jan 1960 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Edward Liso Mungoni v The Attorney General of Northern Rhodesia (Rhodesia and Nyasaland) [1960] UKPC 4 25 Jan 1960 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Radhakrishen M. Khemaney v Lachabai Murlidhar (Eastern Africa) [1960] UKPC 5 28 Jan 1960 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The University of Ceylon v EFW Fernando [1960] UKPC 6; [1960] 1 All ER 631; [1960] 1 WLR 223 16 Feb 1960 PC Viscount Simonds, Tucker, Jenkins, Morris of Borth-y-Gest LL,MD De Silva Commonwealth, Natural Justice (Ceylon) The plaintiff had complained of his suspension as a student by the appellant. The suspension had been lifted and the Inquiry leading to it had been set aside as null and void. It had been alleged that he had had advance knowledge of an exam paper. He did not know what evidence was given against him, and he was not given an oportunity to cross examine the witness. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â S.A. Suppiah v J. J. Kanagaratnam (Ceylon) [1960] UKPC 7 18 Feb 1960 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Hussenabai Hassanally and Another v Mohammed Muheeth Mohammed Cassim and Others (Ceylon) [1960] UKPC 8 7 Mar 1960 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Beatrice Suneethra Perera v N. A. Perera and Others [1960] UKPC 9 8 Mar 1960 PC Commonwealth Ceylon [ Bailii ] Â The Attorney-General for The State of South Australia v Brown [1960] UKPC 10 9 Mar 1960 PC Commonwealth (Australia) [ Bailii ] Â Augustus Patterson v Dr. Patrick Vincent Joseph Solomon (Trinidad and Tobago) [1960] UKPC 11 21 Mar 1960 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Nana Yao Nkansah Ii v Nana Asante Yiadom Iii (Deceased) Nana Asante Yiadom Iv Substituted (West Africa) [1960] UKPC 13 21 Mar 1960 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Clifford W L Callwood v Else E Callwood [1960] UKPC 12 21 Mar 1960 PC Commonwealth (West Indies) [ Bailii ] Â Hong Guan and Company Limited v Regina, Jumabhoy and Sons Limited (Singapore) [1960] UKPC 14 4 Apr 1960 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Rev. Mapitgama Buddharakkita Thero v Don Edmund Wijawardena and Others (Ceylon) [1960] UKPC 15 26 Apr 1960 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Parochial Church Council of The Parish of Little Leigh (Pastoral Measure) v The Church Commissioners (Jcpc) [1960] UKPC 16 2 May 1960 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Dudley Ernest Lyncoln Wager Felix v The General Dental Council (The Disciplinary Committee of The General Dental Council) [1960] UKPC 17 11 May 1960 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Abdul Rahman Al Baker v Robert Edmund Alford and Patrick Vincent Truebody [1960] UKPC 19 1 Jun 1960 PC Commonwealth (St Helena) [ Bailii ] Â Vere Cornwall Bird and Others v Joseph Reynold O'Neil and Another [1960] UKPC 23; 132 LT 707; [1924] All ER 110 26 Jul 1960 PC Commonwealth (West Indian) [ Bailii ] Â Reginald Ernest Vere Denning v David Geoffrey Edwardes and Another (Eastern Africa) [1960] UKPC 31 10 Oct 1960 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Lee v Lee's Air Farming Limited [1960] 3 All ER 420; [1960] UKPC 33; [1960] 3 WLR 758; [1961] AC 12 11 Oct 1960 PC Viscount Simons, Lord Reid, Lord Tucker, Lord Denning, Lord Morris Company, Employment, Commonwealth Mr Lee had formed a company, Lee's Air Farming Limited and held nearly all its shares. He was the managing director, but by profession a pilot. The company was formed to conduct an aerial top-dressing business. He appointed himself the chief pilot for the company. In the Court of Appeal of New Zealand, North J said: "These powers were moreover delegated to him for life and there remained with the company no power of management whatsoever. One of his first acts was to appoint himself the only pilot of the company, for, although article 33 foreshadowed this appointment, yet a contract could only spring into existence after the company had been incorporated. Therefore, he became in effect both employer and worker. True, the contract of employment was between himself and the company: see Booth v Helliwell, but on him lay the duty both of giving orders and obeying them. In our view, the two offices are clearly incompatible. There could exist no power of control and therefore the relationship of master-servant was not created." Held: Appeal allowed. "one person may function in dual capacities. " and "Ex facie there was a contract of service . . the real issue is whether the position of the deceased as sole governing director made it impossible for him to be the servant of the company in the capacity of chief pilot of the company. . . there was no such impossibility. There appears to be no greater difficulty in holding that a man acting in one capacity can give orders to himself in another capacity than there is in holding that a man acting in one capacity can make a contract with himself in another capacity. The company and the deceased were separate legal entities. The company had the right to decide what contracts for aerial top-dressing it would enter into. The deceased was the agent of the company in making the necessary decisions." [ Bailii ] Â The Honourable William Mcculloch Gollan and Another v The Randwick Municipal Council [1960] UKPC 32 11 Oct 1960 PC Commonwealth New South Wales [ Bailii ] Â Â The Commercial Banking Company of Sydney Limited v Edward Rolf Mann; PC 16-Oct-1960 - [1960] UKPC 30 Â Lawal Buraimah Fatoyinbo and Others v Seliatu Abike Williams Alias Sanni and Others [1960] UKPC 35 16 Nov 1960 PC Commonwealth (Nigeria) [ Bailii ] Â Nana Owusu Ahenkora Ii v Kwabena Ofe and Another [1960] UKPC 36 22 Nov 1960 PC Commonwealth (Ghana) [ Bailii ] Â The Katikiro of Buganda v The Attorney General (Eastern Africa) [1960] UKPC 37 24 Nov 1960 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Council of The Shire of Ashford v Dependable Motors Pty. Limited [1960] UKPC 38 29 Nov 1960 PC Commonwealth (Australia) [ Bailii ] Â Angelina Arefunwon and Others v Sally Shola Barber and Others (Nigeria) [1960] UKPC 39 29 Nov 1960 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Joe Appiah and Others v Basil Noah Basil (West Africa) [1960] UKPC 40 8 Dec 1960 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Â H.E. Golightly and Another v E.J. Ashrifi and Others; PC 19-Dec-1960 - [1960] UKPC 41 Â Â Caffoor v Columbo Income Tax Commissioner; PC 1961 - [1961] AC 584 Â Nominal Defendant v Clements (1961) 104 CLR 476 1961 Dixon CJ Criminal Evidence, Commonwealth (Australia) "The judge at the trial must determine for himself upon the conduct of the trial before him whether a case for applying the rule of evidence has arisen and, from the nature of the matter, if there be an appeal, great weight should be given to his opinion by the appellate court. It is evident however that the judge at the trial must exercise care in assuring himself not only that the account given by the witness in his testimony is attacked on the ground of recent invention or reconstruction or that a foundation for such an attack has been laid by the party, but also that the contents of the statement are in fact to the like effect as his account given in his evidence and that having regard to the time and circumstances in which it was made it rationally tends to answer the attack. It is obvious that it may not be easy sometimes to be sure that counsel is laying a foundation for impugning the witness’s account of a material incident or fact as a recently invented, devised or reconstructed story. Counsel himself may proceed with a subtlety which is the outcome of caution in pursuing what may prove a dangerous course." 1 Citers Â Nominal Defendant v Clements [1961] 104 CLR 476 1961 Dixon CJ Criminal Practice, Commonwealth (High Court of Australia) Dixon CJ said of the rules regarding the significance of previous inconsistent statements: "in as much as the rule forms a definite exception to the general principle excluding statements made out of court and admits a possibly self-serving statement made by the witness, great care is called for in applying it. The judge at the trial must determine for himself upon the conduct of the trial before him whether a case for applying the rule of evidence has arisen and, from the nature of the matter, if there be an appeal, great weight should be given to his opinion by the appellate court . . It is obvious that it may not be easy sometimes to be sure that counsel is laying a foundation for impugning the witness's account of a material incident or fact as a recently invented, devised or reconstructed story. Counsel himself may proceed with a subtlety which is the outcome of caution in pursuing what may prove a dangerous course. That is one reason why the trial judge's opinion has a peculiar importance." 1 Citers Â Â Greenwood v Fitt; 1961 - [1961] 29 DLR 1 Â Â Elvan Rose v The Queen; PC 1961 - [1961] AC 49 Â Smith v Smith [1962] (3) SA 930 1961 Briggs ACJ Commonwealth (Supreme Court of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland) The husband, a fugitive from justice in England, had entered Southern Rhodesia on a false passport and his entry and residence had at all times been unlawful under the Immigration Act. The wife obtained a declaration of nullity, but on the husband's appeal, the court questioned its own jurisdiction. The court conducted a full review of the authorities. Held: The court distinguished the cases of precarious residence and condoned residence, and found more helpful some South African cases on the statutory concept of domicile in their Immigration Act (which was deliberately distinguished from the common law concept in another case cited by Dicey and Morris, Parker v Principal Immigration Officer [1926] CPD 255) and the cases holding that a domicile of choice acquired during precarious residence was destroyed by actual deportation, at least where there was also a prohibition on return (including Ex parte Macleod [1946] CPD 312, the last of the cases cited by Dicey and Morris; see also Ex parte Donelly 1915, WLD 29; Ex parte Gordon 1937, WLD 35). He concluded: "I should formulate the proposition in this way. Acquisition of a domicile of choice requires both residence and animus manendi. Not every kind of de facto residence will suffice. It must usually be residence of one's free will, or at least, if it is not, the residence can be of no value as evidence of an animus manendi. The animus manendi must be both genuine and honest. An intention to persist indefinitely in a course of unlawful conduct may be genuine: but it cannot be honest. Fears that the worst may happen do not necessarily preclude a sufficient animus. But knowledge that one is residing only in defiance of the law, and will so continue indefinitely, makes it impossible to have an animus manendi of the requisite quality. I think also that the matter may properly be put in another way. The animus manendi, though it does not require an absolute intention to reside permanently, must at least be an unconditional intention to reside for an indefinite period. . . . In this case, the intention of the appellant, putting it at the highest, can only have been, 'I will stay in Rhodesia if I can escape the attention of the authorities whose statutory duty is to deport me, and who will at once do so if they learn the true facts about me.' 1 Citers Â National Insurance Co of New Zealand Ltd The v Espagne [1961] ALR 627; (1961) 105 CLR 569 1961 Commonwealth, Damages The court considered the relevance of a pension awarded to an injured person. 1 Citers Â Â Annamunthodo v Oilfields Workers' Trade Union; PC 1961 - [1961] AC 945 Â Commercial Banking Co of Sydney Ltd v Mann [1961] AC 1; [1960] 3 All ER 482 1961 PC Viscount Simonds, Lord Reid, Lord Radcliffe, Lord Tucker and Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest Commonwealth, Company, Banking, Torts - Other The respondent Mann practiced as a solicitor in partnership with Richardson. They kept a "trust account" in the partnership name with the Australian and New Zealand Bank in Sydney ("ANZ"). Under the partnership agreement, all assets belonged to Mann, but cheques might be drawn on the partnership bank account by either. Mann gave the necessary authority to ANZ. Richardson used that authority to draw cheques, inserting on each after the printed word "Pay", the words "Bank cheque favour H. Ward" or "Bank cheque H. Ward;". He also filed application forms for bank cheques in favour of H. Ward to a like amount, purporting to sign them on behalf of the firm. He took the documents to ANZ, which in each case debited the firm's account and issued a bank draft of an equal amount in the form "Pay H. Ward or bearer." He took the cheques to the appellant bank, and cashed them over the counter. The bank paid the cheques. He was fraudulent throughout; Ward was not a client of the partnership, nor had any client authorised the payment to him of any money held in the trust account. Mann sued the appellant bank for conversion of the bank cheques, or alternatively to recover the sums received by it from ANZ bank as money had and received to his use. He succeeded before the trial judge, whose decision was affirmed by the Court of Appeal of New South Wales. Held: The bank's appeal succeeded. Mann never obtained any title to the cheques, and he could not obtain title by ratifying the conduct of Richardson in obtaining the cheques from ANZ bank, without at the same time ratifying the dealings in the cheques by Ward and the appellant bank. Mann's claim for damages for conversion failed, and that his alternative claim for money had and received also failed. Where a partner in a firm wrongfully draws a cheque on the partnership account, the proceeds of the cheque are legally his. Viscount Simonds said: "It is important to distinguish between what was Richardson's authority in relation on the one hand to the A.N.Z. bank and on the other to Mann. No question arises in these proceedings between Mann and the A.N.Z. bank. It is clear that Mann could not as between himself and the bank question Richardson's authority to draw cheques on the trust account. The position as between Mann and Richardson was different. Richardson had no authority, express or implied, from Mann either to draw cheques on the trust account or to obtain bank cheques in exchange for them except for the proper purposes of the partnership. If he exceeded those purposes, his act was unauthorised and open to challenge by Mann. It is in these circumstances that the question must be asked whether, as the judge held, the bank cheques were throughout the property of Mann. It is irrelevant to this question what was the relation between Richardson and Ward and whether the latter gave any consideration for the bank cheques that he received and at what stage Mann learned of the fraud that had been practised upon him. The proposition upon which the respondent founds his claim is simple enough: Richardson was his partner and in that capacity was able to draw upon the trust account and so to obtain from the bank its promissory notes: therefore the notes were the property of the partnership and belonged to Mann, and Richardson could not give a better title to a third party than he himself had." 1 Cites 1 Citers Â The Queen v Panikkapody Edirmanasingham (Ceylon) [1961] UKPC 1 17 Jan 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Overseas Tankship (U.K.) Limited v Morts Dock and Engineering Company Limited (New South Wales) [1961] UKPC 2 18 Jan 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Ralli Estates Limited v The Commissioner of Income Tax (Eastern Africa) [1961] UKPC 3 30 Jan 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Attorney General of Ceylon v H.R. Fonseka and Another (Ceylon) [1961] UKPC 4 31 Jan 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Cecily Harriet Matilda Pieris v Charlotte Mary Clara Fernando and Another (Ceylon) [1961] UKPC 5 13 Feb 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Australian Hardwoods Pty. Limited v The Commissioner for Railways (New South Wales) [1961] UKPC 6 16 Feb 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â C.A. Savage and Others v M. O. Uwechia (Nigeria) [1961] UKPC 7 21 Feb 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Chief Okro Orukumakpor (For Himself and Ajamatan Family of Gbumidaka) v Itebu and Others (For Themselves and On Behalf of The People of Elume) (Nigeria) [1961] UKPC 8 22 Feb 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Kojo Asante v Compagnie Francaise De L' Afrique Occidentale (Ghana) [1961] UKPC 9 28 Feb 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Elvan Rose v The Queen (Bahamas) [1961] UKPC 10 6 Mar 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Austin Ritcher v Emma Kwaley Shang Alias Emma Kwaley Quartey (Ghana) [1961] UKPC 11 7 Mar 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Rosetta Cooper v Gerald Neville and Another (Eastern Africa) [1961] UKPC 12 9 Mar 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Nana Adjei Iii, Ohene of Okadjakrom for and On Behalf of The Stool and People of Okadjakrom v Nana Adjedu Ii, Ohene of Atonkor for and On Behalf of The Stool and People of Atonkor and Others (West African) [1961] UKPC 13 21 Mar 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â All Saints, Clifton Emmanuel, Clifton and St. Mary The Virgin, and Others (Pastoral Measure) v The Church Commissioners (Jcpc) [1961] UKPC 14 27 Mar 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Mohamed Falil Abdul Caffoor and Others The Trustees of Abdul Gaffoor Trust v The Commissioner of Income Tax, Columbo (Ceylon) [1961] UKPC 15 19 Apr 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Nana Darko Frempong Ii v Mankrado Ewaku Effah, Mankrado of Aperade Substituted for Nana Otsibu Ababio Ii (Deceased) (Ghana) [1961] UKPC 16 20 Apr 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Mangaleswari, A Minor, Appearing By Her Next Friend Sinnamma v Velupillai Selvadurai and Others (Ceylon) [1961] UKPC 17 26 Apr 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Sydney Hastings Dowse v Attorney General Federation of Malaya [1961] UKPC 18 2 May 1961 PC Radcliffe, Denning Guest Commonwealth, Family (Malaya) The appellant had obtained a decree nisi of divorce, but the respondent then intervened saying that since he too had committed adultery he was not entitled to the decree, and the decree was rescinded. The appellant had denied the evidence of the woman making the allegation. Corroboration had been found in another incident. [ Bailii ] Â The Attorney-General of The Gambia v N'Jie [1961] UKPC 19; [1961] AC 617 3 May 1961 PC Radcliffe, Denning and Guest LL Commonwealth, Judicial Review (West Africa) Lord Denning said: "The words ‘person aggrieved’ are of wide import and should not be subjected to a restrictive interpretation. They do not include, of course, a mere busybody who is interfering in things which do not concern him; but they do include a person who has a genuine grievance because an order has been made which prejudicially affects his interests." 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Kanagasunderam Nadesan v Vaithilingam Ramasamy (Ceylon) [1961] UKPC 20 8 May 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Almed Refai Bin Adham Salih and Others v Valliyammai Atchi and Another (Ceylon) [1961] UKPC 21 8 May 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Director of Public Works and Another v Ho Po Sang and Others [1961] UKPC 22; [1961] 3 WLR 39; [1961] 2 All ER 721; [1961] AC 901 15 May 1961 PC Lord Denning, Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest, L M D de Silva Commonwealth (Hong Kong) [ Bailii ] Â Sarah Quagraine v B. Crosby Davies (Substituted for Sam Ferguson, Deceased) [1961] UKPC 23 31 May 1961 PC Commonwealth (Ghana) [ Bailii ] Â Leslie Elgar Gardiner v The General Medical Council (The Disciplinary Committee of The General Medical Council) [1961] UKPC 24 31 May 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Victorine Roberts and Another v Letter T Estates Limited and Others (West Indies) [1961] UKPC 25 8 Jun 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Charles Macdonald Whitehouse v The State of Queensland and Others and The Attorney General of The Commonwealth of Australia and Others (Australia) [1961] UKPC 27 14 Jun 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Dennis Hotels Proprietary Limited v The State of Victoria and Another and The Attorney General of The Commonwealth of Australia and Others (Australia) [1961] UKPC 26 14 Jun 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Leelawathy Sellathurai Wife of Karthigesu Sunthera Rajah and Another v Annaledchumy Widow of Nallathamby Sellathurai (Ceylon) [1961] UKPC 28 20 Jun 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Yaw Duedu v Evi Yiboe (Ghana) [1961] UKPC 29 20 Jun 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â John Kwesi Taylor v Joshua Fanye Davis (West Africa) [1961] UKPC 31 26 Jun 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Chief Fagbayi Oloto for Himself and On Behalf of The Other Members of The Oloto Chieftaincy Family Since Deceased Substituted By Chief Immam Ashafa Tijani v The Attorney General (Nigeria) [1961] UKPC 30 26 Jun 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Shoukatalle v The Queen (West Indies) [1961] UKPC 32 5 Jul 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Â John De Freitas v The Queen; PC 10-Jul-1961 - [1961] UKPC 33 Â Olatunji Omotayo v A. Y. Ojikutu (Nigeria) [1961] UKPC 35 17 Jul 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Â Sunshine Porcelain Potteries Proprietary Limited v Nash; PC 17-Jul-1961 - [1961] UKPC 34 Â Nana Katabola Ii, Ohene of Apesokubi v Nana Osei Bonsu, Ohene of Asatu (Consolidated Appeals) (West Africa) [1961] UKPC 36 18 Jul 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â R. B. Wuta-Ofei v Mabel Danquah (West Africa) [1961] UKPC 39 24 Jul 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Nii Amon Kotie Substituted for Nii Amasah Nikoi Olai, Mantse of Asere Djorshie for Himself and Representing The Stool of and Subjects of Asere Djorshie v The Asere Stool (West Africa) [1961] UKPC 37 24 Jul 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Naja David C. H. Ghassoub and N. H. Ghassoub Trading In Partnership As Naja David Sawmill Company and Another v Edward Kotey Annan Sasraku (Ghana) [1961] UKPC 38 24 Jul 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Kwame Mensah Otherwise Nana Akwamuhene v Kojo Abrokwa and Another (West Africa) [1961] UKPC 40 25 Jul 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â James Albert De Gregory v General Medical Council (The Disciplinary Committee of The General Medical Council) [1961] UKPC 42 26 Jul 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Walter Annamunthodo v Oilfields Workers' Trade Union (West Indies) [1961] UKPC 41 26 Jul 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Kwami Bladu and Others v Amba Amoabimaa Queen Mother of The Ampiakoko Section of The Yego Family and Another (West Africa) [1961] UKPC 43 26 Jul 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Attorney - General of Ceylon v The Scinda Steam Navigation Company Limited, India (Ceylon) [1961] UKPC 44 3 Oct 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Adel Boshali v Allied Commercial Exporters Limited (Nigeria) [1961] UKPC 45 14 Nov 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Yeow Kim Pong Realty Limited v Ng Kim Pong (Malaysia) [1961] UKPC 52 18 Dec 1961 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Thornton v The Police [1962] AC 339 PC 1962 PC Commonwealth, Constitutional Leave to appeal was refused on the ground that the judgment of Hammet J was clearly correct. He held that nothing in the Act "precludes either the United Kingdom or any of the colonies from enacting such legislation as they chose to regulate and control the entry into their territory or residence therein of persons whatever their status may be". British Nationality Act 1948 1 Citers Â Â The Queen v King; 1962 - [1962] SCR 746 Â Â Palaniappa Chettiar v Arunasalam Chettiar; PC 31-Jan-1962 - [1962] UKPC 1a Â Alimahomed Osman v Ngoni-Matengo Co-Operative Marketing Union Limited [1962] UKPC 2 8 Feb 1962 PC Commonwealth (Eastern Africa) [ Bailii ] Â Ata Ui Haq v City Council of Nairobi [1962] UKPC 3 13 Feb 1962 PC Commonwealth Eastern Africa [ Bailii ] Â Â Chettiar v Chettiar; PC 14-Feb-1962 - [1962] AC 294; [1962] UKPC 1; [1962] UKPC 4; [1962] 2 WLR 548; [1962] 2 All ER 238 Â Evelyn Letitia Peiris v Millie Agnes De Silva [1962] UKPC 5 15 Feb 1962 PC Commonwealth Ceylon [ Bailii ] Â Rajaratnam Sivakumaran (Executor of The Estate of Veergathipillai Rajartnam Deceased) v Veergathipillai Rajartnam [1962] UKPC 6 20 Feb 1962 PC Commonwealth (Ceylon) [ Bailii ] Â Saif Bin Sultan Hussain Al'Quaiti and Others v HH Sultan Awad Din Sultan [1962] UKPC 7 21 Feb 1962 PC Commonwealth Eastern Africa [ Bailii ] Â Chai Sau Yin v Liew Kwee Sam (Malaysia) [1962] UKPC 8 27 Feb 1962 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Bank of Ceylon Jaffna v Kandar Arumugam Chelliahpillai [1962] UKPC 9 5 Mar 1962 PC Commonwealth Ceylon [ Bailii ] Â Kanda v Government of the Federation of Malaya [1962] AC 322; [1962] UKPC 2; [1962] 2 WLR 1153 2 Apr 1962 PC Lord Denning, Lord Hodson, Lord Devlin Commonwealth, Natural Justice, Constitutional A police officer had been dismissed. He complained that he had not been allowed to see the report of the Board of Inquiry which contained prejudicial material and which had been relied upon by the officer adjudicating his case. Held: The failure amounted to a denial of a reasonable opportunity of being heard in answer to the charge and was unfair. Where a conflict was found between an existing law and a provision of the constitution, the Constitution had to prevail. Lord Denning said: "In the opinion of their Lordships, however, the proper approach is somewhat different. The rule against bias is one thing. The right to be heard is another. Those two rules are the essential characteristics of what is often called natural justice. They are the twin pillars supporting it. The Romans put them in the two maxims: Nemo judex in causa sua: and Audi alteram partem. They have recently been put in the two words, Impartiality and Fairness. But they are separate concepts and are governed by separate considerations. In the present case inspector Kanda complained of a breach of the second. He said that his constitutional right had been infringed. He had been dismissed without being given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. If the right to be heard is to be a real right which is worth anything, it must carry with it a right in the accused man to know the case which is made against him. He must know what evidence is given and what statements have been made affecting him: and then he must be given a fair opportunity to correct or contradict them . . it follows, of course, that the Judge or whoever has to adjudicate must not hear evidence or receive representations from one side behind the back of the other. The Court will not enquire whether the evidence or representations did work to his prejudice. Sufficient that they might do so. The Court will not go into the likelihood of prejudice. The risk of it is enough. No one who has lost a case will believe he has been fairly treated if the other side has had access to the Judge without his knowing.” Lord Denning considered the conflict between the provisions under review and the Malaysian constitution: "If there was in any respect a conflict between the existing law and the Constitution . . then the existing law would have to be modified so as to accord with the Constitution." and "In a conflict of this kind between the existing law and the Constitution, the Constitution must prevail. The court must apply the existing law with such modifications as may be necessary to bring it into accord with the Constitution." 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â B. Surinder Singh Kanda v The Government of The Federation of Malaya [1962] UKPC 10 2 Apr 1962 PC Commonwealth (Malaya) [ Bailii ] Â Chellammah v Vyravan Kanapathy and Others [1962] UKPC 11 3 Apr 1962 PC Commonwealth False (Ceylon) [ Bailii ] Â Jayalal Anandagoda v The Queen [1962] UKPC 13 4 Apr 1962 PC Commonwealth (Ceylon) [ Bailii ] Â Abeysiri Munasinghege Lairis Appu v K. Wijesundera Guneratne Heart Mudiyanseralahamilage Enid Nandawathie Tennakoon Kumarihamy and Others [1962] UKPC 12 4 Apr 1962 PC Commonwealth (Ceylon) [ Bailii ] Â Govindji Popatlal v Nathoo Visandji (Eastern Africa) [1962] UKPC 14 1 May 1962 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Nalla Karumburu Kayambu Shanmugam v The Commissioner for The Registration of Indian and Pakistani Residents (Ceylon) [1962] UKPC 15 7 May 1962 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Ram Bali v The Queen (Fiji) [1962] UKPC 16 6 Jun 1962 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Bicber Limited (In Voluntary Liquidation) Formerly S. Davison and Company Limited) v The Commissioners of Income Tax (West Indies) [1962] UKPC 18 19 Jun 1962 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Nwuba Mora and Others v H.E. Nwalusi and Others (Nigeria) [1962] UKPC 17 19 Jun 1962 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Omar Lababedi and Others (Trading Under The Name and Style of Lababedi and Company v Chairman Lagos Executive Development Board [1962] UKPC 19 18 Jul 1962 PC Commonwealth (Nigeria) [ Bailii ] Â Yisa Dawodu and Others v Suwebatu Danmole and Others (Nigeria) [1962] UKPC 20 25 Jul 1962 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â John Vincent Stagnetto and Others v Louis Abrines and Others Trustees of The Estate of Richard Abrines Deceased [1962] UKPC 21 25 Jul 1962 PC Commonwealth (Gibraltar) [ Bailii ] Â Australian Blue Metal Limited v Robert Frank Hughes and Others [1962] UKPC 23 25 Jul 1962 PC Commonwealth (New South Wales) [ Bailii ] Â Janme Jai Prasad and Jaimuni Prasad v The Comptroller of Customs (Fiji) [1962] UKPC 22 26 Jul 1962 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Lee Chun-Chuen Alias Lee Wing-Chuek v The Queen (Hong Kong) [1962] UKPC 24 30 Jul 1962 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Michael Abela and Others v Maria Felicia Cremona and Another [1962] UKPC 25 2 Oct 1962 PC Commonwealth (Malta) [ Bailii ] Â Jerome Francis v The Municipal Councillors of Kuala Lampur [1962] UKPC 26 3 Oct 1962 PC Commonwealth (Malaya) [ Bailii ] Â The Attorney General of Ceylon v Mihindukulasuriya Guruge Joseph Michael De Livera and Another (Ceylon) [1962] UKPC 27 5 Nov 1962 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Commissioner of Inland Revenue v A.W. Davith Appuhamy (Ceylon) [1962] UKPC 28 12 Nov 1962 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Government of The Federation of Malaya v Rimau Onibus Company Limited of Ipoh (Malaya) [1962] UKPC 29 13 Nov 1962 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Hugh Thomas Miller v The Minister of Mines and The Attorney General of New Zealand (New Zealand) [1962] UKPC 30 20 Nov 1962 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Chua Chee Chor v Chua Kim Yong Administrator of The Estate of Chua Ah Chee Alias Chua Kee Peng Deceased and Others (Malaya) [1962] UKPC 31 20 Nov 1962 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Premchand Nathu and Co. Ltd. v The Land Officer (Eastern Africa) [1962] UKPC 32 27 Nov 1962 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Lim Foo Yong Limited v The Collector of Land Revenue (Malaya) [1962] UKPC 33 27 Nov 1962 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Lim Chin Aik v The Queen (Singapore) [1962] UKPC 34 29 Nov 1962 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Musabhai Noormohamed Tejani and Others v The Official Receiver [1962] UKPC 35 3 Dec 1962 PC Commonwealth (Eastern Africa) [ Bailii ] Â Fontin v Katapodis [1962] 108 CLR 177; [1963] ALR 582; 36 ALJR 283; [1962] HCA 63 10 Dec 1962 Sir Owen Dixon CJ, McTiernan, Owen JJ Commonwealth, Torts - Other (High Court of Australia) The plaintiff struck the defendant with a weapon, a wooden T-square. It broke on his shoulder. The defendant then picked up a sharp piece of glass with which he was working and threw it at the plaintiff, causing him severe injury. The Judge had reduced the damages from Â£2,850 to Â£2,000 by reason of the provocation. Held: Provocation could be used to wipe out the element of exemplary or aggravated damages but could not be used to reduce the actual figure of pecuniary compensation. So they increased the damages to the full Â£2,850. 1 Citers [ Austlii ] Â Gamalath Ralalage Daniel Appuhamy v The Queen [1962] UKPC 36 13 Dec 1962 PC Commonwealth (Ceylon) [ Bailii ] Â Riziki Binti Abdulla and Another v Sharifa Binti Mohamed Bin Hemed and Others [1962] UKPC 37 17 Dec 1962 PC Commonwealth (Eastern Africa) [ Bailii ] Â Cyril Bunting Rogers-Wright v Abdul Bai Kamara [1962] UKPC 38 17 Dec 1962 PC Commonwealth (West Africa) [ Bailii ] Â Kruber v Grzesiak [1963] VR 621 1963 Adams J Commonwealth, Limitation, Torts - Other The plaintiff had issued a writ claiming damages for personal injuries caused by negligent driving more than three years after the accident, and now wanted to amend the writ by adding a claim for trespass to the person based on the same facts. The court asked whether the applicable limitation Act covered an allegation of unintentional trespass to the person. Held: Adams J said: "I would see no sufficient reason for excluding an action for trespass to the person] from the description of an action for damages for breach of duty, especially when it is provided that the duty may be one existing independently of any contract or any provision made by or under a statute. After all, do not all torts arise from breach of duty - the tort of trespass to the person arising from the breach of a general duty not to inflict direct and immediate injury to the person of another either intentionally or negligently in the absence of lawful excuse? The substance of the matter appears to be that section 5(6) is intended to provide a special limitation period of three years for actions in which damages for personal injuries are claimed. No doubt, as was pointed out in argument, this intention might have been achieved by the use of other and perhaps simpler and more direct language, but that does not seem to be a sufficient reason for not giving to the language chosen its full meaning." 1 Citers Â Jones v Skelton [1963] 1 WLR 1362; [1963] 3 All ER 952; [1963] UKPC 29 1963 PC Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest, Viscont Radcliffe, Lord Jenkins, Lord Gest, Sir kenneth Gresson Defamation, Commonwealth (New South Wales) Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest discussed how words subject to a claim in defamation should be read: "In deciding whether words are capable of conveying a defamatory meaning the court will reject those meanings which can only emerge as the product of some strained or forced or utterly unreasonable interpretation." As to the width of the concept of 'natural and ordinary meaning', he said: "The ordinary and natural meaning of words may be either the literal meaning or it may be an implied or inferred or an indirect meaning: any meaning that does not require the support of extrinsic facts passing beyond general knowledge but is a meaning which is capable of being detected in the language used can be a part of the ordinary and natural meaning of words. See Lewis v. Daily Telegraph Ltd . . The ordinary and natural meaning may therefore include any implication or inference which a reasonable reader guided not by any special but only by general knowledge and not fettered by any strict legal rules of construction would draw from the words." 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Cox v Army Council [1963] AC 48; (1962) 46 Cr App R 258 1963 PC Viscount Simonds, Lord Reid Crime, Armed Forces, Commonwealth The provisions of the English Army Act, are to be applied "in diverse circumstances wherever the armed forces of the Crown happen to be, in developed or undeveloped countries, as conquerors or guests, and their purpose is . . Disciplinary." Criminal law applies only in respect of acts committed or omissions made within England. Viscount Simons said: "apart from those exceptional cases in which specific provision is made in regard to acts committed abroad, the whole body of the criminal law of England deals only with acts committed in England." and "with rare exceptions the whole body of our criminal law is 'domestic' in the sense that it is made for the order and good government of this country and is applicable only to acts done on English soil." 1 Citers Â Deaton v Attorney General and Revenue Commissioners [1963] IR 170 1963 Constitutional, Commonwealth (Supreme Court of Ireland) The court looked at a law in which the choice of alternative penalties was left to the executive: 'There is a clear distinction between the prescription of a fixed penalty and the selkection of a penalty for a particular case. The prescription of a fixed penalty is the statement of a general rule, which is one of the characteristics of legislation; this is wholly different from the selection of a penalty to be imposed in an individual citizen's case; it states the general rule, and the application of that rule is for the Courts . . . The selection of punishment is an integral part of the administration of justice, and, as such, cannot be committed to the hands of the executive . . . ' 1 Citers Â Savoy Corp Ltd v Development Underwriting Ltd (1963) NSWR 138 1963 Jacob L Company, Commonwealth (Australia) The court discussed the extent of the director's powers to arrange the company to prevent a take over: "It would seem to me to be unreal in the light of the structure of modern companies and of modern business life to take the view that directors should in no way concern themselves with the infiltration of the company by persons or groups which they bona fide consider not to be seeking the best interests of the company. My own view is that the directors ought to be allowed to consider who is seeking control and why. If they believe that there will be substantial damage their powers to defeat those seeking a majority will not necessarily be categorised as improper.” 1 Citers Â New Zealand Netherlands Society "Oranje" Inc v Laurentuis Cornelis Kuys [1973] 1 WLR 1126 1963 PC Lord Wilberforce Trusts, Commonwealth (New Zealand) The scope of a fiduciary duty may be modified by a course of dealing by the person to whom the duty is owed. "The obligation not to profit from a position of trust, or, as it sometimes relevant to put it, not to allow a conflict to arise between interest and duty, is one of strictness. The strength, and indeed the severity, of the rule has recently been emphasised by the House of Lords in Phipps v. Boardman …. It retains its vigour in all jurisdictions where the principles of equity are applied. Naturally it has different applications in different contexts. It applies, in principle, whether the case is one of a trust, express or implied, of partnership, of directorship of a limited company, of principal and agent, or master and servant, but the precise scope of it must be moulded according to the nature of the relationship." A trustee seeking to to obtain a benefit or incur or enter into any transaction which is a prima facie breach of his fiduciary duties, must make full and frank advance disclosure. 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Ibrabhim Momordu Allie (Administrator of The Estate of Alhaji Antumani Allie Deceased) v Hajah Fatmatta Katah [1963] UKPC 2 17 Jan 1963 PC Commonwealth Sierra Leone and Gambia [ Bailii ] Â Vincenzini v The Regional Commissioner of Income Tax [1963] UKPC 3 28 Jan 1963 PC Commonwealth, Income Tax (Eastern Africa) [ Bailii ] Â Sidney Godfrey De Zoysa v The Public Service Commission and Others [1963] UKPC 4 29 Jan 1963 PC Commonwealth (Ceylon) [ Bailii ] Â Almon Eugene Hardtmann v The Queen [1963] UKPC 7 1 Apr 1963 PC Commonwealth, Crime (Bermuda) [ Bailii ] Â Sulay Seisay v Pa Sheka Kanu and Others [1963] UKPC 6 1 Apr 1963 PC Commonwealth (Sierra Leone) [ Bailii ] Â Vijaya Wickramatunga Vidyasagara v The Queen [1963] UKPC 8 1 Apr 1963 PC Commonwealth (Ceylon) [ Bailii ] Â Abdul Wahab Mohammed Sameen v Palliyaguruge Vithanage Sumanawathie Abeyewickrema and Others [1963] UKPC 9 3 Apr 1963 PC Commonwealth (Ceylon) [ Bailii ] Â The United Maketing Company v Hasham Kara [1963] UKPC 10 8 Apr 1963 PC Commonwealth (Eastern Africa) [ Bailii ] Â Truth (N.Z.) Limited v Gladys Valentine Howey (New Zealand) [1963] UKPC 11 7 May 1963 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Hussaima, Wife of Yoosuf Jallaldeen, and Others v A. L. Ummu Zaneera Alias Shamsunnahar and Others [1963] UKPC 12 9 May 1963 PC Commonwealth (Ceylon) [ Bailii ] Â The Honouable Sir George William Kelly Roberts Trading As The City Lumber Yard v Albert Soltys [1963] UKPC 13 14 May 1963 PC Commonwealth Bahamas [ Bailii ] Â Nathaniel Stuart Chalmers v Lawrence Pardoe (Figi) [1963] UKPC 14 21 May 1963 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Alhaji D. S. Adegbenro v Chief S. L. Akintola and Sir Adesoji Aderemi (Nigeria) [1963] UKPC 15 27 May 1963 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Aluthge Don Hemapala v The Queen (Ceylon) [1963] UKPC 16 27 May 1963 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Mrs. Hilda Vander Poorten v Joseph Vander Poorten (Ceylon) [1963] UKPC 21 11 Jul 1963 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Misty Amar Singh v Serwano Wofunira Kulubya (Eastern Africa) [1963] UKPC 22 22 Jul 1963 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â G. O. Laja v M. A. Okupe (Nigeria) [1963] UKPC 24 23 Jul 1963 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Ponnupillai, Widow of Velauther Kathirgamar v Chellappah Kumaravetpillai (Ceylon) [1963] UKPC 23 23 Jul 1963 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Warehousing and Forwarding Company of East Africa Limited v Jafferali and Sons Limited (Eastern Africa) [1963] UKPC 25 30 Jul 1963 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Zainab Bint Abdulla Gulab and Another v Kulsum Bint Abdul Khaleq and Another (Eastern Africa) [1963] UKPC 27 2 Oct 1963 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Malcolm Stewart Broadhurst v The Queen (Malta) [1963] UKPC 28 22 Oct 1963 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Â Ibralebbe Alias Rasa Wattan Another v The Queen; PC 6-Nov-1963 - [1964] All ER 900; [1963] UKPC 34 Â George Alexander Selkirk v Romar Investments Limited (Bahamas) [1963] UKPC 30 11 Nov 1963 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Freddie A. Short v The Attorney General of Sierra Leone (Sierra Leone and Gambia) [1963] UKPC 31 18 Nov 1963 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Mahadeva Sivarajah v The General Medical Council (The Disciplinary Committee of The General Dental Council) [1963] UKPC 32 19 Nov 1963 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Sparks v The Queen [1964] 1 All ER 727; [1964] 2 WLR 566; [1964] AC 964; [1963] UKPC 33 4 Dec 1963 PC Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest Criminal Evidence, Commonwealth (Bermuda) A complaint by the alleged victim of a sexual offence is admissible at common law as hearsay only where the complainant gives evidence of the commission of the offence and only for the purpose of showing the consistency of the complainant's conduct in making the complaint and of the statement or statements made by the complainant at the first reasonable opportunity with the complainant's evidence in court. It is trite law that the burden of proof is on the prosecution to establish that statements given were "made freely and voluntarily and not under the influence of improper inducement." There is no special rule making hearsay admissible in identification cases. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Marie Ayoub and Others v Standard Bank of South Africa Limited and Another As Executors of The Estate of Christos Galanos Deceased (Eastern Africa) [1963] UKPC 35 9 Dec 1963 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Kok Hoong v Leong Cheong Kweng Mines Limited (Malaya) [1963] UKPC 36 10 Dec 1963 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Free Lanka Insurance Company Limited v AE Ranasinghe [1963] UKPC 37 16 Dec 1963 PC Commonwealth (Ceylon) [ Bailii ] Â Ibralebbe v The Queen [1964] AC 900 1964 PC Viscount Radcliffe Commonwealth, Constitutional (St. Christopher and Nevis) A power to make laws for "peace, order and good government" was used to confer legislative power on the Parliament of independent Ceylon, to connote "in British constitutional language, the widest law-making powers appropriate to a Sovereign". The Privy Council is the final court in the St Kitts hierarchy of courts. 1 Citers Â Beck v Montana Constructions Pty Ltd [1964-5] NSWR 229 1964 Commonwealth (New South Wales) 1 Citers Â Ibralebbe v The Queen [1964] AC 900 1964 PC Commonwealth, Constitutional (Grenada) In an appeal from the Court of Appeal of Grenada, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council forms part of the Grenadian judicial system. Section 53 of the constitution which empowered Parliament to "make laws for the peace, order and good government", connoted "the widest law-making powers appropriate to a Sovereign" 1 Citers Â Kapeller v Rondalia Versekeringskorporasie van Suid-Afrika Bpk 1964 (4) SA 722 (T) 1964 Litigation Practice, Commonwealth, Limitation (South Africa) A clear admission by an insurer of liability in the course of without prejudice negotiations about quantum was sufficient to restart the limitation period. 1 Citers Â Osele and Others On Behalf of The People of Onicha-Ibabu v Nwokeleke and Others for Themselves and On Behalf of The People of Iselegu [1964] UKPC 1 14 Jan 1964 PC Commonwealth (Nigeria) [ Bailii ] Â Tay Keng Hong v Heap Eng Moh Steamship Co Ltd [1964] UKPC 2 14 Jan 1964 PC Commonwealth Singapore [ Bailii ] Â The Commissioner of Taxes v Nchanga Consolidated Copper Mines Limited [1964] UKPC 3 15 Jan 1964 PC Commonwealth (Rhodesia and Nyasaland) [ Bailii ] Â Nathaniel Stuart Chalmers v The Fiji Kisan Sangh (Fiji) [1964] UKPC 4 22 Jan 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Ibeneweka and Others v Egbuna and Another for Themselves and On Behalf of The Ukwa Family of Umunasele Onitsha [1964] UKPC 5 23 Jan 1964 PC Commonwealth (Nigeria) [ Bailii ] Â Edward Campello and Others v Julius C. Sene (Gibraltar) [1964] UKPC 6 25 Jan 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Abudu Gbadamosi Ijale v B.A. Shonibare (Nigeria) [1964] UKPC 7 25 Jan 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â John Khalil Khwam and Company (Trading As John Khalil Khwam) v K. Chellaram and Sons (Nig.) Limited (Consolidated Appeals) (Nigeria) [1964] UKPC 8 2 Mar 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Â Commissioner for Railways v Quinlan; PC 9-Mar-1964 - [1964] 1 All ER 897; [1964] 2 WLR 817; [1964] AC 1054; [1964] UKPC 9 Â Charles Morgan v Najlo A Khyatt [1964] UKPC 10 9 Mar 1964 PC Commonwealth (New Zealand) [ Bailii ] Â Lim Lian Geok v The Minister of The Interior, Federation of Malaya (Malaya) [1964] UKPC 11 23 Mar 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Tadeyo Kwalira and Joseph Duncan v The Queen (Rhodesia and Nyasaland) [1964] UKPC 12 23 Mar 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Frank Parker v The Queen (New South Wales) [1964] UKPC 16 23 Mar 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Aminu Akindele Ajani Ojora and Others v Lasisi Ajibola Odunsi (Nigeria) [1964] UKPC 14 7 Apr 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Kanjee Naran v The Commissioner of Income Tax (Eastern Africa) [1964] UKPC 13 7 Apr 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Faweze Moukarihim v Abolade Olatunji Coker and Others (Nigeria) [1964] UKPC 15 7 Apr 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Li Keung Pong Alias Li Siu Cheung v The Attorney General of Hong Kong (Hong Kong) [1964] UKPC 17 9 Apr 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Ramdeo Buckett v The Queen (Trinidad and Tobago) [1964] UKPC 18 15 Apr 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Azuike Ume and Others for Themselves and As Representing The People of Akpo v Alfred Ezechi and Others for Themselves and As Representing The People of Achina (Nigeria) [1964] UKPC 19 27 Apr 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Â The Bribery Commissioner v Ranasinghe; PC 5-May-1964 - [1964] 2 WLR 1301; [1965] AC 172; [1964] 2 All ER 785; [1964] UKPC 1; [1964] UKPC 20 Â Albert James Mauritzen Trading As A.J. Mauritzen and Co. v Gordon Grant and Company Limited (West Indies) [1964] UKPC 21 26 May 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Consolidated Agencies Limited v Bertram Limited (Eastern Africa) [1964] UKPC 22 1 Jun 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Dr. Esin Anwana Esin (For Himself and As Representing The Esin Family of Eyo Abasi) v Atang Edem Abasi and Others (Nigeria) [1964] UKPC 23 3 Jun 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Anachuna Nwakobi, The Osha of Obosi and Others V. Eugene Nzekwu and Another v Anachuna Nwakobi, The Osha of Obosi and Another V. Phillip Anatogu and Another (Nigeria) [1964] UKPC 24 15 Jun 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Colin Kenneth Mccoan v The General Medical Council (Jcpc) [1964] UKPC 26 29 Jun 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Henry Augustus Morton Whitby v The General Medical Council (Jcpc) [1964] UKPC 25 29 Jun 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Sardah Mohamed Maherally Shroff v The Commissioner of Income Tax (Eastern Africa) [1964] UKPC 27 7 Jul 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â S. M. Ogundipe-Alatishe Trading Under The Name and Style of French Medicine Stores v The Lagos Executive Development Board and Another (Nigeria) [1964] UKPC 28 13 Jul 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Egonekwu Dim and Others v Anusionwu Duru and Others (Nigeria) [1964] UKPC 30 14 Jul 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Nwanko Udegbe and Others v Anachuna Nwokafor and Others (Nigeria) [1964] UKPC 29 14 Jul 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The National Bank of Nigeria Limited v Oba M. S. Awolesi (Nigeria) [1964] UKPC 31 15 Jul 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Abudu Gbadamosi Ijale v A.G. Leventis and Company Limited (And Cross-Appeal Consolidated) (Nigeria) [1964] UKPC 32 16 Jul 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Jones Adeyeye v E.T. Adewoyin and Others Representing The Ademakin/Ademiluyi (Nigeria) [1964] UKPC 33 16 Jul 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Banque Genevoise De Commerce Et De Credit v Compania Martima De De Isola Spetsai Limitada (Nigeria) [1964] UKPC 34 20 Jul 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Queen v Murugan Ramasamy Alias Babun Ramasamy (Ceylon) [1964] UKPC 35 21 Jul 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Nnaegbo Ekweze and Others V. Ajana Enwelum and Another, Uzodigwe Madika and Others V, Nwanwuba Asiegbu and Others v And, Ajana Aduka and Others V. Vincent Ekwealor (Nigeria) [1964] UKPC 36 21 Jul 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Amusa Yesufu Oba and Another v Hunmuani Ajoke (Nigeria) [1964] UKPC 38 22 Jul 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Her Majesty'S Attorney- General for New Zealand v The Mayor, Councillors and Citizens of The City of Lower Hutt (New Zealand) [1964] UKPC 37 22 Jul 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Chiu Nang Hong v The Public Prosecutor (Malaya) [1964] UKPC 41 23 Jul 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Aderawos Timber Company Limited v Bale Adedire and Others (Nigeria) [1964] UKPC 40 28 Jul 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Ajayi Trading Under The Name and Style of The Colony Carrier Company v RT Briscoe (Nigeria) Limited [1964] UKPC 39 28 Jul 1964 PC Commonwealth Nigeria [ Bailii ] Â Jag Singh (An Infant) Suing By His Father and Next Friend Sham Singh S/O Utam Singh v Toong Fong Omnibus Co. Ltd (Malaya) [1964] UKPC 43 5 Oct 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Farrier Uwaimak Limited v The Bank of New Zealand [1964] UKPC 42 5 Oct 1964 PC Commonwealth (New Zealand) [ Bailii ] Â Herbert George Warren v Tay Say Geok and Others (Malaya) [1964] UKPC 44 5 Oct 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Commissioner of Stamp Duties (Queensland) v Livingston [1965] AC 694; [1964] UKPC 2; [1964] UKPC 45 7 Oct 1964 PC Viscount Radcliffe Wills and Probate, Stamp Duty, Commonwealth A testator had died domiciled in New South Wales and with real and personal property both in New South Wales and in Queensland. He left one-third of his real and personal estate to his widow absolutely. She then died intestate, also domiciled in New South Wales, but the husband's estate was not yet fully administered. No clear residue had yet been ascertained and no final balance attributable to the shares of residue had been determined. The question was whether the deceased widow's share in her husband's real and personal estate in Queensland, a share that had devolved on her death on those entitled under her intestacy, was subject to Queensland succession duty. Did she die owning a beneficial interest in any real or personal property in Queensland? Held: No Queensland succession duty was payable. The estate of a deceased which devolves on personal representatives comes to them "virtute officii . . in full ownership, without distinction between legal and equitable interests" but they hold the estate "for the purpose of carrying out the functions and duties of administration, not for [their] own benefit". A beneficiary under an estate has no interest in the property to be administered, but only a right to require the estate to be duly administered, and to receive an appropriate proportion of the nett estate. Viscount Radcliffe said: "their Lordships regard it as clearly established that Mrs. Coulson was not entitled to any beneficial interest in any property in Queensland at the date of her death. What she was entitled to in respect of her rights under her deceased husband's will was a chose in action, capable of being invoked for any purpose connected with the proper administration of his estate" 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Western Transport Pty. Ltd. V. Norman Eggert Kropp and v Maranoa Transport Pty. Ltd. V. Norman Eggert Kropp (Consolidated Appeals) (Queensland) [1964] UKPC 46 15 Oct 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The University Council of Vidyodaya University of Ceylon v Linus Silva (Ceylon) [1964] UKPC 47 5 Nov 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Richard Mapolisa v The Queen (Rhodesia and Nyasaland) [1964] UKPC 48 10 Nov 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â White Hudson and Co. Limited v Asian Organisation Limited (Singapore) [1964] UKPC 49 16 Nov 1964 PC Commonwealth (Singapore) [ Bailii ] Â White Hudson and Co. Limited v Asian Organisation Limited (Singapore) [1964] UKPC 49 16 Nov 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Thamboo Ratnam v Thamboo Cumarasamy and Another (Malaya) [1964] UKPC 50 23 Nov 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Ng Eng Hiam v Ng Kee Wei and Others (Malaya) [1964] UKPC 53 3 Dec 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Abdul Azeez and Others v The Queen (Ceylon) [1964] UKPC 54 8 Dec 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Shipping Association of Jamaica v The Bustamante Industrial Trade Union and Others (Jamaica) [1964] UKPC 55 9 Dec 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Sin Poh Amalgamated (HK) Limited v The Honourable The Attorney General and Another [1964] UKPC 56 10 Dec 1964 PC Commonwealth Hong Kong [ Bailii ] Â J.M. Construction Company Limited and Another v Hutt Timber and Hardware Company Limited (New Zealand) [1964] UKPC 57 14 Dec 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Attorney General of Ceylon v Allen Ellington Reid (Ceylon) [1964] UKPC 58 15 Dec 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â British Guiana Credit Corporation v Clement Hugh Da Silva (British Caribbean Court) [1964] UKPC 59 16 Dec 1964 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Jones v Gleeson (1965) 39 ALJR 258; [1966] ALR 235 1965 Commonwealth, Damages, Personal Injury (Australia) When a policeman who had retired retired through injury sought damages for that injury, the pension he received as a result of his retirement was to be ignored entirely: "In recent years, however, the relevance or otherwise to the issue of damages of the fact that an injured person is entitled to a pension has been considered by this Court on several occasions (see Paff v. Speed; The National Insurance Co. of New Zealand, Ltd. v. Espagne, and Graham v. Baker n) and a very different view has been taken from that which is expressed in the majority judgments in Browning's case." 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Rootes v Shelton (1968) ALR 33; (1967) 116 CLR 383 1965 Barwick CJ, Kitto J Negligence, Commonwealth (High Court of Australia) Barwick CJ said: "By engaging in a sport or pastime the participants may be held to have accepted risks which are inherent in that sport or pastime: the tribunal of fact can make its own assessment of what the accepted risks are: but this does not eliminate all duty of care of the one participant to the other. Whether or not such a duty arises, and, if it does, its extent, must necessarily depend in each case upon its own circumstances. In this connection, the rules of the sport or game may constitute one of those circumstances: but, in my opinion, they are neither definitive of the existence nor of the extent of the duty; nor does their breach or non-observance necessarily constitute a breach of any duty found to exist." Kitto J said: "in a case such as the present, it must always be a question of fact, what exoneration from a duty of care otherwise incumbent upon the defendant was implied by the act of the plaintiff in joining in the activity. Unless the activity partakes of the nature of a war or of something else in which all is notoriously fair, the conclusion to be reached must necessarily depend, according to the concepts of common law, upon the reasonableness, in relation to the special circumstances, of the conduct which caused the plaintiff's injury. That does not necessarily mean the compliance of that conduct with the rules, conventions or customs (if there are any) by which the correctness of conduct for the purpose of the carrying on of the activity as an organised affair is judged; for the tribunal of fact may think that in the situation in which the plaintiff's injury was caused a participant might do what the defendant did and still not be acting unreasonably, even though he infringed the 'rules of the game'. Non-compliance with such rules, conventions or customs (where they exist) is necessarily one consideration to be attended to upon the question of reasonableness; but it is only one, and it may be of much or little or even no weight in the circumstances." 1 Citers Â Gian Singh and Co. v Devraj Nahar Alias Devraj Nahar and Others (Malaya) [1965] UKPC 1 12 Jan 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Joseph Edward Hotung v The Collector of Stamp Revenue (Hong Kong) [1965] UKPC 2 14 Jan 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Parochial Church Council of The Benefice of St. Bartholomew and St. Luke, Bowling (Pastoral Measure) v The Church Commissioners (Jcpc) [1965] UKPC 3 21 Jan 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Sinclair Eugene Swan v Salisbury Construction Company Limited [1965] UKPC 4 1 Feb 1965 PC Commonwealth (Bermuda) [ Bailii ] Â D. Robosingho Mudalali v L.D.P. Jayawardene and Others (Ceylon) [1965] UKPC 5 4 Feb 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Albert Joseph Arzu v Allan Edmund Arthurs and Another (British Honduras) [1965] UKPC 9 17 Feb 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Pacific Motor Auctions Pty. Limited v Motor Credits (Hire Finance) Limited (Australia) [1965] UKPC 6 3 Mar 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Universal Guarantee Pty. Limited v The National Banlk of Australia Limited (New South Wales) [1965] UKPC 8 24 Mar 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Gulbanu Rajabali Kassam v Kampala Aerated Water Co. Ltd. (Eastern Africa) [1965] UKPC 7 24 Mar 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Solo Dabo v Abdalla Mousa (Gambia) [1965] UKPC 12 30 Mar 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Lily Harriet Ram Iswera v The Commissioner of Inland Revenue (Ceylon) [1965] UKPC 10 30 Mar 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â G. Weston, M. L. Franks, S. E. Rutter and P. Gadd (Acting On Behalf of The Friends of Holy Trinity Church, Langley) (Pastoral Measure) v The Church Commissioners (Jcpc) [1965] UKPC 11 30 Mar 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Kelvin Lucky v Pandit Dinnath Tewari and Another (Trinidad and Tobago) [1965] UKPC 13 5 Apr 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Andrew Joseph O'Toole v Jack Scott and Another (New South Wales) [1965] UKPC 14 5 Apr 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Kabaka'S Government and Another v The Attorney General of Uganda and Another (Uganda) [1965] UKPC 15 6 Apr 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Mayor and Corporation of Port Louis v The Honourable Attorney General of Mauritiuis [1965] UKPC 17; [1965] AC 1111 27 Apr 1965 PC Commonwealth, Administrative Meaningful public participation in a decision-making process, in a context with which the general public cannot be expected to be familiar, requires that the consultees should be provided not only with information about the draft scheme, but also with an outline of the realistic alternatives, and an indication of the main reasons for the authority's adoption of the draft scheme. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Â Abdul Khalid Abdul Moomin Khan v Mahanti Mulla Gamage Ariyadasa; PC 27-Apr-1965 - [1965] UKPC 16 Â Sheila Prescod and Benjamin Jacob James v Elaine Reece (British Guiana) [1965] UKPC 18 1 Jun 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â James Rolle v The Queen (Bahamas) [1965] UKPC 19 23 Jun 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Parochial Church Council of St. John The Baptist and Edgar E. Joyce (Pastoral Measure) v The Church Commissioners (Jcpc) [1965] UKPC 20 28 Jun 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â M. K. S. Seyed Mohammed Shareef v The Commissioner for The Registration of Indian Pakistani Residents (Ceylon) [1965] UKPC 21 30 Jun 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Atureliya Walendagodage Henry Senanayake v Annie Yeo Siew Cheng (Singapore) [1965] UKPC 22 15 Jul 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Geral Louis Jeremiah v Lee Yew Kwai and Another (Malaysia) [1965] UKPC 25 27 Jul 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Mobil Oil Australia Limited v The Commissioner of Taxation of The Commonwealth of Australia (Australia) [1965] UKPC 24 27 Jul 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Geral Louis Jeremiah v Lee Yew Kwai and Another (Malaysia) [1965] UKPC 25 27 Jul 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â B. P. Australia Limited v The Commissioner of Taxation of The Commonwealth of Australia (Australia) [1965] UKPC 23 27 Jul 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Kabaka'S Government v [27 July 1965] (Uganda) [1965] UKPC 26 5 Oct 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Comptroller of Customs v Western Lectric (Fiji) [1965] UKPC 28 6 Oct 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Joitabhai S/O Khodabhai Patel v The Comptroller of Customs [1965] UKPC 27 6 Oct 1965 PC Commonwealth (Fiji) [ Bailii ] Â Sungarapulle Thambiah v The Queen (Ceylon) [1965] UKPC 29 7 Oct 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Utah Construction Company and Engineering Pty. Limited and Another v Janos Pataky (New South Wales) [1965] UKPC 30 7 Oct 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â V. N. Sockalingam Chettier v A. K. R. Karuppan Chettier (Ceylon) [1965] UKPC 32 18 Oct 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Green Cab Service Pty. Limited and Others v John Edward Whitfield and Another (New South Wales) [1965] UKPC 31 18 Oct 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Perumbadu Piyasena Wickramasuriya v Samarasuriya Liyanaarachchi Sirmathie Ratnavalia Samarasuriya (Ceylon) [1965] UKPC 33 21 Oct 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Janis Wijesuriya v H. R. Amit (Ceylon) [1965] UKPC 34 21 Oct 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Devkunverben, Widow of Popatlal Karman, and Others v Ahamed Din Butt (Eastern Africa) [1965] UKPC 36 16 Nov 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Dr. M. G. Perera v Daria Memalta Henry [1965] UKPC 35 16 Nov 1965 PC Commonwealth Ceylon [ Bailii ] Â Patrick Alfred Reynolds v The Commissioner of Income Tax (Trinidad and Tobago) [1965] UKPC 37 23 Nov 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â National and Grindlays Bank Limited v Kentiles Limited (In Liquidation) and The Official Receiver (As Liquidator Therof) (Eastern Africa) [1965] UKPC 38 25 Nov 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Don John Francis Douglas Liyanage and Others Reasons v The Queen (Ceylon) [1965] UKPC 39 2 Dec 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Â Liyanage and others v The Queen; PC 2-Dec-1965 - [1965] UKPC 1; [1966] 2 WLR 682; [1967] 1 AC 259; [1966] 1 All ER 650 Â Antoine Choppy and Another v Mericia Angela Bibi (Otherwise Choppy) and Others (Mauritius) [1965] UKPC 40 6 Dec 1965 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Regina v Braye-Jones [1966] Qd R 295 1966 Lucas J Criminal Evidence, Commonwealth (Queensland Court of Criminal Appeal) The admissibility of evidence of recent complaint where the evidence of the complainant and the evidence of the contemporaneous complaint differed. Rejecting the suggestion that evidence of the contemporaneous complaint should not have been given as it was inconsistent with the evidence of the complainant: "Clearly enough, evidence of statements made by the prosecutrix which did not bear any resemblance at all to her sworn evidence would not be admissible, for such evidence would be irrelevant. In my opinion, however the matter is one of degree, and if the substance of the complaint can be identified as relating to the story told by the prosecutrix in evidence and if it is such that a jury can reasonably regard it as constituting a complaint of a matter of a sexual nature, then I think that inconsistency as to detail is a matter for the jury to consider in their assessment of the credibility of the prosecutrix" 1 Cites 1 Citers Â McCarthy v Wellington City [1966] NZLR 481 1966 Commonwealth, Land, Negligence A person storing dangerous explosives on his premises owed a duty of care to keep them secure to all persons foreseeably likely to be injured as a result of a breach of that duty. 1 Citers Â Commissioner for Railways v McDermott [1966] 2 All ER 162 PC; [1966] 3 WLR 267; [1967] 1 AC 169 1966 PC Commonwealth 1 Citers Â Liyange v Regina [1966] 1 All ER 650; [1967] AC 259; [1966] 2 WLR 682 1966 PC Constitutional, Commonwealth The appellant, who had been involved in an attempted coup in Ceylon, sought to argue that a retroactive law relating to his trial was void. Held: The argument succeeded. The separation of powers inherent in the Constitution had been infringed, and the appellant's conviction was quashed. However judicial power is distributed between courts, it is to continue to be vested in persons appointed to hold judicial office in the manner and terms set down by the constitution in the chapter on the judicature, and even though it may not be set out explicitly. Under a Westminster style constitution, the legislature not only does not, but can not, prescribe the penalty to be imposed in an individual citizen's case. "Their Lordships cannot accept the view that the legislature while removing the fetter of repugnancy to English law, left in existence a fetter of repugnancy to some vague unspecified law of natural justice. The terms of the Colonial Laws Validity Act and especially the words 'but not otherwise' in section 2 make it clear that Parliament was intending to deal with the whole question of repugnancy. Morover, their Lordships doubt whether Lord Mansfield was intending to say that what was not repugnant to English law might yet be repugnant to fundamental principles or to set up the latter as a different test from the former. Whatever may have been the possible arguments in this matter prior to the passing of the Colonial Laws Validity Act, they are not maintainable at the present date. No case has been cited in which during the last 100 years any judgment (or, so far as one can see, any argument) has been founded on that portion of Lord Mansfield's judgment." 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Simon Runyowa v The Queen (Rhodesia and Nyasaland) [1966] UKPC 1 19 Jan 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Coast Brick and Tile Works Limited and Others v Premchand Raichand Limited and Another (Eastern Africa) [1966] UKPC 3 31 Jan 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Australia and New Zealand Bank Limited v Ateliers De Constructions Electriques De Charleroi (New South Wales) [1966] UKPC 4 22 Feb 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Skelton v Collins (1966) 115 CLR 94; [1966] HCA 14 7 Mar 1966 Kitto, Taylor, Menzies, Windeyer and Owen JJ Commonwealth, Damages, Constitutional (High Court of Australia) Damages - Personal Injuries - Loss of earning capacity - Loss of expectation of life - Loss of amenities during reduced life span - Pain and suffering - Plaintiff rendered permanently unconscious by injuries - Basis of assessment. Precedent - Decisions of House of Lords - Applicability - High Court - Other Australian courts. 1 Citers [ Austlii ] Â The Commissioner for Railways v Patricia Van Mcdermott (New South Wales) [1966] UKPC 5 10 Mar 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â National and Grindlays Bank Limited v Dharamshi Vallabhji and Others [1966] UKPC 7 10 May 1966 PC Commonwealth (Eastern Africa) [ Bailii ] Â Desmond Lees Peate v The Commissioner of Taxation of The Commonwealth of Australia (Australia) [1966] UKPC 8 17 May 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Cobb and Co. Limited and Others v Norman Eggert Kropp; Cobb and Co. Limited and Others v The Honourable Thomas Alfred Hiley and Another [1967] 1 AC 141; [1966] 3 WLR 416; [1966] 2 All ER 913; [1966] UKPC 9 24 May 1966 PC Commonwealth Queensland [ Bailii ] Â Overseas Tankships (U.K.) Limited v The Miller Steamship Co. Pty. Limited and Another (And Cross-Appeal Consolidated) (New South Wales) [1966] UKPC 10 25 May 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Australian Consolidated Press Ltd v Uren (1966) 117 CLR 185; [1966] HCA 37 2 Jun 1966 Commonwealth, Defamation, Damages (High Court of Australia) 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Austlii ] Â Uren v John Fairfax and Sons Pty Ltd (1966) 117 CLR 118; [1966] HCA 40 2 Jun 1966 McTiernan, Taylor, Menzies, Windeyer and Owen JJ Commonwealth, Damages, Defamation (High Court of Australia) "It seems to us that, in a case where there is no qualified privilege to report or repeat the defamatory statements of others, the whole cohesion of the law of defamation would be destroyed, if it were permissible merely to plead and prove that the defamatory statement was made by another; that this fact was stated in the matter complained of and that the defamatory imputation was not adopted or affirmed. The law as to qualified protection of the reports of certain designated matters would be largely if not wholly redundant." and 'It seems to me that, properly speaking, a man defamed does not get compensation for his damaged reputation. He gets damages because he was injured in his reputation, that is simply because he was publicly defamed. For this reason, compensation by damages operates in two ways—as a vindication of the plaintiff to the public and as consolation to him for a wrong done. Compensation is here a solatium rather than a monetary recompense for harm measurable in money.' (Windeyer J) 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Austlii ] Â Manikpura Peiris Munasinghe v Cynthia Pearline Vidanage and Another (Ceylon) [1966] UKPC 11 7 Jun 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Â Goldman v Hargrave; PC 13-Jun-1966 - [1967] 1 AC 645; [1966] 3 WLR 513; [1966] 2 All ER 989; [1966] UKPC 2; [1966] UKPC 12 Â Pathirana v Pathirana [1967] 1 AC 233; [1966] 3 WLR 666; [1966] UKPC 14 28 Jun 1966 PC Guest, Pearce, Upjohn, Pearson LL, Sir Frederic Sellers Commonwealth, Company, Trusts A partnership between the parties had held a contract for the exclusive supply of a foreign company's goods in Ceylon. One of the partners cancelled the partnership's contract and took a new contract in his name alone. This contract was said to be personal to that partner. Held: The Privy Council advised that this new contract was to be treated as partnership property, since it arose out of the substantial goodwill which the partnership had generated. After termination, one partner carries on the partnership business using the capital of the other, that partner is liable to account to the partnership. [ Bailii ] Â Peter Felix v Ivan Thomas (Trinidad and Tobago) [1966] UKPC 13 28 Jun 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Salim Rakar v The Queen (Ceylon) [1966] UKPC 15 30 Jun 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â West Bank Estates Limited v Shakespeare Cornelius Arthur (Substituted for John Victor Deceased) and Another (West Indies) [1966] UKPC 16 11 Jul 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Rasiah Munusamy v The Public Services Commission (Malaysia) [1966] UKPC 17 12 Jul 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Chintamanie Ajit v Joseph Mootoo Sammy (British Caribbean) [1966] UKPC 18 12 Jul 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Commissioner of Inland Revenue v Mutual Investment Company Limited (Hong Kong) [1966] UKPC 19 20 Jul 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Kesiwe Malindi v The Queen (Rhodesia and Nyasaland) [1966] UKPC 20 21 Jul 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Lee Kar Choo Trading As Yeen Thye Company v Lee Lian Choon Trading As Chuan Lee Company (Malaysia) [1966] UKPC 21 4 Oct 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Chung Kum Moey Alias Ah Ngar v Public Prosecutor for Singapore (Malaysia) [1966] UKPC 23 17 Oct 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Mohan v R. (Trinidad and Tobago) [1966] UKPC 3 20 Oct 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Ramnath Mohan and Another v The Queen (Trinidad and Tobago) [1966] UKPC 24 20 Oct 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Commissioner of Income Tax v Hanover Agencies Limited [1966] UKPC 28; [1969] TR 515; [1967] 2 WLR 565; [1967] 1 AC 681; [1967] 1 All ER 954 14 Dec 1966 PC Commonwealth (Jamaica) [ Bailii ] Â A. T. Durayappah of Chundikuly, Mayor of Jaffna v W. J. Fernando and Others (Ceylon) [1966] UKPC 29 15 Dec 1966 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Â Liyanage v The Queen; PC 1967 - [1967] 1 AC 259 Â Golak Nath v State of Punjab (1967) 2 SCJ 762 1967 Commonwealth (Supreme Court of India) The court considered whether it had jurisdiction to make a rulinging which was prospective only. Held: The court reversed two earlier decisions of its own in circumstances where meanwhile constitutional amendments had been made, and state laws enacted, on the basis of the court's earlier two decisions. 1 Citers Â Â Frazer v Walker; PC 1967 - [1967] AC 569 Â Davis v Hassan [1967] 117 NLJ 72 1967 Commonwealth All cases calling for attribution of liaibility where an emergency vehicle is in collision with another vehicle fall to be decided on their own facts. 1 Citers Â Kariapper v Wijesinha [1968] AC 717; [1967] 3 All ER 485 1967 PC Constitutional, Commonwealth The legislation at issue imposed "civil disabilities" on Members of Parliament against whom allegations of bribery had been sustained, including the loss of their seats in Parliament. The question arose whether they had been punished. Held: Sir Douglas Menzies contrasted discuplinary and criminal proceedings. In the former category no offence was specified and no declaration of guilt made. "Speaking generally, however, their Lordships would observe that it is not readily to be assumed that disciplinary action, however much it may hurt the individual concerned, is personal and retributive rather than corporate and self-respecting." The words "amend or repeal" do not cover or allow an alteration of a law by implication. 1 Citers Â Devan Nair v Yong Kuan Teik [1967] 2 AC 31 1967 PC Lord Upjohn Elections, Commonwealth (Malaysia) The Malaysian election rules provide in certain circumstances for service by a notice published in the Gazette but such notice was in the event out of time. Held: The respondent's appeal should be allowed and the petition struck out. Lord Upjohn said: "So the whole question is whether the provisions of rule 15 are 'mandatory' in the sense in which that word is used in the law ie, that a failure to comply strictly with the times laid down renders the proceedings a nullity; or 'directory', ie, that literal compliance with the time schedule may be waived or excused or the time may be enlarged by a judge . . Circumstances which weigh heavily with their Lordships in favour of a mandatory construction are: (1) The need in an election petition for a speedy determination of the controversy . . (2) In contrast, for example, to the Rules of the Supreme Court in this country, the rules vest no general power in the election judge to extend the time on the ground of irregularity. Their Lordships think this omission was a matter of deliberate design . . The case of Williams -v- Tenby Corporation which has stood the test of nearly 90 years and seems to their Lordships plainly rightly decided, strongly supports the view that the provisions of rule 15 were mandatory . . their Lordships cannot attribute weight to the circumstances that the rules contained no express power to strike out a petition for non-compliance with rule 15." 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Â Chin Keow v Government of Malaysia; PC 1967 - [1967] 1 WLR 813 Â Â C. Devan Nair v Yong Kuan Teik; PC 11-Jan-1967 - [1967] UKPC 1 Â Rattan Singh S/O Nagina Singh v The Commissioner of Income Tax (Eastern Africa) [1967] UKPC 2 2 Feb 1967 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Director of Public Prosecutions v Patrick Nasralla (Jamaica) [1967] UKPC 3 20 Feb 1967 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â R. P. Doobay and Others v Mohabeer [1967] UKPC 4 21 Feb 1967 PC Commonwealth (British Caribbean) [ Bailii ] Â Boots The Chemist (New Zealand) Limited and Others v The Chemist's Service Guild of New Zealand Incorporated and Another [1967] UKPC 5 21 Feb 1967 PC Commonwealth (New Zealand) [ Bailii ] Â Tio Chee Chuan v Khoo Siak Chiew and Others [1967] UKPC 6 2 Mar 1967 PC Commonwealth Malaysia [ Bailii ] Â The United Engineering Workers Union v K. W. Devanayagam, President, Eastern Province Agricultural Co-Operative Union Limited (Ceylon) [1967] UKPC 7 9 Mar 1967 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Coulls v Bagot's Executor and Trustee Co Ltd (1967) 119 CLR 460 21 Mar 1967 Barwick C.J.(1), McTiernan(2), Taylor(3), Windeyer(4) and Owen(3) JJ Commonwealth, Contract, Damages (High Court of Australia) The court considered an action for damages by a party to a contract to enforce an obligation intended to benefit another. Held: Windeyer J: " I can see no reason why in such cases the damages which A would suffer upon B's breach of his contract to pay C $500 would be merely nominal: I think that in accordance with the ordinary rules for the assessment of damages for breach of contract they could be substantial. They would not necessarily be $500; they could I think be less or more." 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Austlii ] Â Freightlines and Construction Holding Limited v The State of New South Wales and The Commissioner of Motor Transport and T.N.T. (Sydney) Pty. and Aothers (Australia) [1967] UKPC 10 10 Apr 1967 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Siow Wong Fatt v Susur Rotan Mining Limited and Another (Malaysia) [1967] UKPC 8 10 Apr 1967 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Sunil Chandra Bhattacharya v The General Medical Council (Jcpc) [1967] UKPC 9 10 Apr 1967 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Panditha Appuhamilage Dharmasena and Mallawanthanthrige Siripala Perera v Inspector of Police Kegalla [1967] UKPC 11 11 Apr 1967 PC Commonwealth Ceylon [ Bailii ] Â Chin Keow v Government of Malaysia and Doctor Joseph Loganathan Devadason (Malaysia) [1967] UKPC 13 13 Apr 1967 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Â Swan v Huntington and Another; PC 13-Apr-1967 - [1967] UKPC 12 Â Ambalavanar Kanayson and Others v Eragunathar Ponnu Rasiah (Ceylon) [1967] UKPC 15 7 Jun 1967 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Lau Liat Meng v Disciplinary Committee (Singapore) [1967] UKPC 14 7 Jun 1967 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Eric Blechynden Moller and Ralph Blechynden Moller v Commissioner of Estate Duty (Hong Kong) [1967] UKPC 16 7 Jun 1967 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Chien Sing-Shou v The Building Authority [1967] UKPC 17; [1967] 1 WLR 1155; [1967] 2 All ER 1228 12 Jun 1967 PC Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest Commonwealth, Natural Justice (Hong Kong) The Board considered the Hong Kong Architects' Disciplinary Board which, by section 5 of the Buildings Ordinance 1955, comprised five members: three architects, the Building Authority or his representative, and "a legal adviser". The appellant contended that any advice on matters of law by the legal adviser should have been given in the presence of the parties; and a failure to follow such a procedure was a breach of common law natural justice. Held: Since the legal adviser was a full member of the board, if, during the deliberation of the board, he gave legal advice to the other members of the board on matters relating to the proceedings, then he stood in the same position as one of the architect members who gave a view on some matter of architectural opinion. In neither case was the member required to disclose to the parties the advice or opinion he had given in the private deliberations; unless, for example, some new point of law arose during the course of the deliberations, in respect of which it would be procedurally unfair to proceed without giving the parties an opportunity to comment. Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest, giving the judgment of the Privy Council, emphasised that: "At all times, however, the legal adviser occupies the position of being a full member of a body charged with the duty of acting judicially in making due enquiry." 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Philip Seevali Wijewardene v George Benjamin Sirisena Gomes and Others (Ceylon) [1967] UKPC 18 5 Jul 1967 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Mohammed Samsudeen Kariapper v S. S. Wijesinha and S. N. Seneviratne (Ceylon) [1967] UKPC 20 24 Jul 1967 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Australian Consolidated Press Limited v Thomas Uren [1967] UKPC 19 24 Jul 1967 PC Commonwealth (Australia) [ Bailii ] Â Owendale Pty Ltd v Anthony [1967] HCA 52; (1967) 117 CLR 539 24 Aug 1967 Windeyer J, Barwick CJ, McTiernan, Kitto, Taylor, Owen JJ Commonwealth, Landlord and Tenant Austlii High Court of Australia - Landlord and Tenant - Lease - Determination - Forfeiture - Covenant to commence erection of building within specified time - Clearing operations commenced - Whether breach - Acceptance of rent after notice of breach - Conduct of lessor and lessee - Waiver - Crown lease - Statutory procedure for determination upon breach of covenant - Effect of conduct upon statutory right to determine - Notice - Requirement that conditions for failure to comply with &which lease may be determined be fully set out - Reference to terms of lease - Whether sufficient - Signature on notice - Delegation of function by Minister - Delegate designated by office held - City Area Leases Ordinance 1936-1964 (A.C.T.), ss. 6,22.* Windeyer J set out the principles behind the waiver of a right to forfeit a lease: "A waiver in this sense is more properly understood as an election. The essence of the doctrine, in cases between landlord and tenant, is that where a Lease contains a provision for forfeiture and a right of re-entry upon breach of a covenant by the lessee, then, upon a breach occurring, the lessor can either take advantage of his right of forfeiture and re-entry or waive this and treat the Lease as still subsisting. If, with knowledge of a breach, giving him a right of re-entry, he does an act inconsistent with his avoiding the Lease, he is deemed to have elected not to avoid it. Anything which a landlord does or says which is an unequivocal recognition of the continued existence of the Lease when he is aware of facts which would have given him a right of re-entry will amount to a waiver of that right. One act which, by the common law, is always regarded as unequivocal, and therefore necessarily a waiver of a right of re-entry on account of a breach of covenant by the lessee, is the lessor's acceptance, with knowledge of the fact of the breach, of rent accrued due after the breach. Apart from any special term in the Lease . . or any statutory modification of the common law, acceptance of rent due in respect of a current period is an obvious recognition of a tenancy then subsisting." [ Austlii ] Â Kepong Prospecting Limited and S. K. Jagatheesan and Others v A. E. Schmidt (Since Deceased) and Marjorie Schmidt (Widow) Substituted for A. E. Schmidt (Deceased) (Malaysia) [1967] UKPC 22 3 Oct 1967 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Trustees for The Port of Aden v Hormusji K. Hathadaru and Another (And Cross-Appeal Consolidated) (Eastern Africa) [1967] UKPC 24 15 Nov 1967 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Khaled Abdul Latif Al Hamad and Others v Athanas Bros. (Aden) Limited [1967] UKPC 25 22 Nov 1967 PC Commonwealth (Eastern Africa) [ Bailii ] Â Woolworths Limited v Stirling Henry Limited (And Cross-Appeal Consolidated) (New South Wales) [1967] UKPC 26 29 Nov 1967 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Public Prosecutor v Oie Hee Koi and Others (Malaysia) [1967] UKPC 21 4 Dec 1967 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â I Waxman and Sons Ltd v Texaco Canada Ltd [1968] 1 DR 642 1968 Commonwealth, Litigation Practice (Ontario High Court) Fraser J said: "I am of opinion that in this jurisdiction a party to a correspondence within the 'without prejudice' privilege is, generally speaking, protected from being required to disclose it on discovery or at trial in proceedings by or against the third party." 1 Citers Â Gooranah v The Queen [1968] MR 122 1968 Rivalland CJ Commonwealth, Criminal Practice (Supreme Court of Mauritius) The appellant had appeared three times before the court before the date of trial. On the morning of trial he produced a letter from a member of the Bar stating that he had just been instructed for the defence, but as he was engaged elsewhere and had not had time to study the case he must ask for a postponement. The trial judge refused. Held: His decision was upheld by the Supreme Court. After referring to section 10(2) of the Constitution: "The all important words of paragraph (d) in my view are 'shall be permitted to defend himself'. The duty on the Court is clear and is impliedly twofold: an accused party must be given a reasonable opportunity to retain the services of a legal representative of his choice and, at the trial of the case, the legal representative must be given full latitude – in accordance with the law of this country – to defend the accused. On the other hand, the duty to retain the services of a legal representative of his choice lies on an accused party and the words 'of his choice' are here again important: they necessarily connote the idea that, if he has a wide choice from among the members of the Bar, the responsibility for the choice is his, not that of the Court. The duty cast on the Court is purely a passive one in so far as the presence of counsel at the trial is concerned, while the responsibility for the briefing of the legal representative and ensuring his presence in Court devolves from the very words of the Constitution on the accused party." The provisions of the Constitution were never intended to be a cloak for the laches of an accused party." 1 Citers Â Regina v Daly (1968) VLR 257 1968 Smith J Crime, Commonwealth The court considered the availability of mistake as to consent as a defence to a charge of rape: "What the learned trial judge did in the present case was to omit from the definition of rape that he gave to the jury all reference to the element of intention ... but to tell the jury that it was a defence to the charge of rape if the accused honestly believed on reasonable grounds that the girl was consenting. He also told them that the Crown had to satisfy them beyond reasonable doubt that the accused did not have such a belief. Even if it were proper to discuss the mental aspect of a charge of rape in terms of a defence of reasonable mistake of fact, this direction as to onus would be erroneous." 1 Citers Â Regina v Flaherty and Others (1968) 89 WN (Pt 1) (NSW) 141 1968 Asprey J Crime, Commonwealth Asprey J considered the mistakae as to the woman's consent as a defence to a charge of rape: "a long line of authority establishes, at any rate so far as I am concerned, that the defence of mistake requires that the accused holds both an honest and reasonable belief in the existence of a state of facts which, if true, would make the act charged innocent." 1 Citers Â Dunbee Ltd v Gilman and Co, (Australia) Pty Ltd [1968] 2 Lloyd's Rep 394; (1968) 70 SR (NSW) 219 1968 Walsh J Commonwealth New South Wales Court of Appeal -The court was asked to enforce an English default judgment. The judgment debtor had "agree[d] to submit to the jurisdiction" of the English court by virtue of a contractual provision that the agreement was "governed by and construed under the Laws of England". Held: Walsh J referred to the division of authority (particularly between Emanuel v Symon and Blohn v Desser) on the question whether a submission could be implied, but said that that need not be decided. If the agreement had to be an express one, it was not essential that a particular form of words should be used: it could mean only that the express terms of the contract, when properly construed, contained an agreement to submit. If an implied agreement sufficed, there was nothing which could lead to the conclusion that, if the agreement was silent on the question, a term could be implied that the judgment debtor had submitted to the jurisdiction. The fact that leave could be given to serve proceedings under RSC Order 11 by virtue of the choice of English law did not amount to a law which "govern[ed]" the contract. 1 Citers Â Lopes v Chettiar [1968] AC 887 1968 PC Viscount Dilhorne Commonwealth, Constitutional (Malaysia) The petitioner had an appeal as of right to the Judicial Committee from the Federal Court of Malaysia under section 74(1)(a)(ii). The Court refused leave to appeal holding that the appeal had no merits and was bound to fail and the petitioner appealed to the Judicial Committee for leave to appeal, or, alternatively, for special leave to appeal from the judgment of the Federal Court. Held: The Federal Court had no discretion to refuse leave to appeal, but refused to grant special leave to appeal. The granting of special leave to appeal by the Judicial Committee is a matter of discretion and not a right. This case was not a fit one for appeal to the Judicial Committee and leave was not to be granted solely on account of the fact that the appeal was wrongly treated by the Federal Court as one in which that court had a discretion. Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (Malaysia) 74(1)(a)(ii) 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Parkasho v Singh [1968] P 233 1968 PC Commonwealth 1 Citers Â Regina v The Secretary of State for The Home Department, ex parte Bhurosah [1968] 1 QB 266 1968 CA Lord Denning MR Commonwealth, Constitutional In Mauritius the Queen is the Queen of Mauritius and the issuing of passports by the Government of Mauritius, although a matter of foreign affairs and therefore under the control of the UK Government, was an act carried out in the name of the Queen in the right of Mauritius, and not the Queen in right of the UK. 1 Citers Â I Waxman and Sons Ltd v Texaco Canada Ltd [1968] 2 OR 452 2 Jan 1968 Commonwealth, Litigation Practice (Court of Appeal of Ontario) The court approved the decision below. 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Kulamma v Manadan (Fiji) [1968] UKPC 2 22 Jan 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Derwent Peiris and Others v Abeysiri Munasinghe Laviris Appu (Ceylon) [1968] UKPC 5 23 Jan 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Ceylon Theatres Limited v Cinemas Limited and Others (Ceylon) [1968] UKPC 4 23 Jan 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Meeruppe Sumanatissa Terunnanse v Warakapitiye Pangnananda Terunnanse [1968] UKPC 3; [1968] AC 1086 23 Jan 1968 PC Lord Devlin Commonwealth, Land Ceylon - A bare licence terminates on the transfer of the licensor's own title. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â R. S. Lopes (Reasons) v N. K. V. Valliappa Chettiar (Malaysia) [1968] UKPC 8 24 Jan 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Deokinanan v The Queen (Guyana) [1968] UKPC 6 1 Feb 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Liew Sai Wah (Reasons) v Public Prosecutor (Malaysia) [1968] UKPC 7 12 Feb 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Aik Hoe and Company Limited v Superintendent of Lands and Surveys, First Division (Malaysia) [1968] UKPC 9 21 Mar 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â M. Vasudevan Pillai and Another v The City Council of Singapore (Singapore) [1968] UKPC 11 23 Mar 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Herman King v The Queen (Jamaica) [1968] UKPC 10 3 Apr 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â A. M. Sheriff v Mohammed Nona Laila (Ceylon) [1968] UKPC 12 1 May 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â United Dominions Corporation (Jamaica) Limited v Michael Mitri Shoucair [1968] UKPC 13 14 May 1968 PC Commonwealth Jamaica [ Bailii ] Â Osman Bin Haji Mohammed Ali and Another v The Public Prosecutor (Malaysia) [1968] UKPC 14 21 May 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Â Cecil Wolsey Curtis Thompson and Another v The Commissioner of Stamp Duties; PC 27-May-1968 - [1968] UKPC 15 Â Â Nilamdeen Mohammed Ishak (Since Deceased) and Others v Ibrahim Lebbe Mohammed Thowfeek and Another; PC 27-Jun-1968 - [1968] UKPC 17 Â S. K. Ningkan v Government of Malaysia (Malaysia) [1968] UKPC 21 25 Jul 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Hui Shiu Wing v Cheung Yuk Alias Loretta Cheung (Hong Kong) [1968] UKPC 19 30 Jul 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â M. T. K. S. S. N. Mohammed Sahib v The Commissioner for The Registration of Indian and Pakistani Residents, Colombo (Ceylon) [1968] UKPC 20 2 Oct 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Henry Walters (Reasons) v The Queen (Jamaica) [1968] UKPC 22 3 Oct 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Yew Phaik Hoon v Quah Ooi Keat and Another (Malaysia) [1968] UKPC 23 14 Oct 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Glasford Phillips (Reasons) v The Queen (Jamaica) [1968] UKPC 24 15 Oct 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â John Petro (Reasons) v The General Medical Council (Jcpc) [1968] UKPC 25 28 Oct 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â A. P. Singh v Ina Mortimer (Guyana) [1968] UKPC 27 13 Nov 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Ogden Industries Pty. Limited v Heather Doreen Lucas (Australia) [1968] UKPC 28 25 Nov 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Tikiri Banda Dullewe v Padma Rukmani Dullewe and Another (Ceylon) [1968] UKPC 29 4 Dec 1968 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Â Australian Consolidated Press Ltd v Uren; PC 1969 - [1969] 1 AC 590 Â Australian Consolidated Press Ltd v Uren [1969] 1 AC 590 1969 PC Commonwealth, Damages, Defamation 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Ocean Estates Limited v Norman Pinder (Bahamas) [1969] UKPC 2 14 Jan 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Joseph Allen Smith v Fatula Christinana Walker and Another (Sierra Leone) [1969] UKPC 1 14 Jan 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Ho Tong Cheong and Others v Overseas Chinese Banking Corporation Limited [1969] UKPC 3 15 Jan 1969 PC Commonwealth Malaysia [ Bailii ] Â M N Guha Majumder v The Attorney General of Sarawak [1969] UKPC 4 16 Jan 1969 PC Commonwealth Malaysia [ Bailii ] Â Syed Ahmed Bin Alwee Al-Junied and Others v Muchool Khanum Reshty (And Cross-Appeal Consolidated) (Malaysia) [1969] UKPC 5 17 Feb 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Broken Hill Proprietary Co Ltd and Another v The Valuer General (New South Wales) [1969] UKPC 7 17 Mar 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Car Owners' Mutual Insurance Company Limited v The Treasurer of The Commonwealth of Australia (Australia) [1969] UKPC 6; [1970] AC 527 17 Mar 1969 PC Lord Wilberforce Commonwealth (Australia) Lord Wilberforce observed that "in a statutory framework it is impossible to conceive of a discretion not controlled by any standard or consideration stated, or to be elicited from, the terms of the Act." 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Don Peter Mellaaratchy v J. A. Naidoo (Ceylon) [1969] UKPC 9 15 Apr 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Mustapha Conteh v A. Kabia (Sierra Leone) [1969] UKPC 8 15 Apr 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Blue Metal Industries Limited and Another v R. W. Dilley and Another (And Consolidated Appeals) (Australia) [1969] UKPC 10 5 May 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Learie Collymore and Another v The Attorney General (Trinidad and Tobago) [1969] UKPC 11 5 May 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Tan Chow Soo v Ratna Ammal Daughter of Veerasingam (Malaysia) [1969] UKPC 12 16 Jun 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Rajah Ratnagopal v The Attorney General [1969] UKPC 14 30 Jun 1969 PC Commonwealth (Ceylon) [ Bailii ] Â John Joseph Akar v The Attorney General of Sierra Leone (Sierra Leone) [1969] UKPC 13 30 Jun 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Pegang Mining Company Limited v Choong Sam and Others (Malaysia) [1969] UKPC 16 1 Jul 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Public Prosecutor v P Yuvaraj [1969] UKPC 15 1 Jul 1969 PC Commonwealth (Malaysia) [ Bailii ] Â Boswell Williams v The Government of The Lsland of St. Lucia (West Indies) [1969] UKPC 17 21 Jul 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Velayuthampillai Mandirampillai and Another v The Attorney General of Ceylon (Ceylon) [1969] UKPC 20 28 Jul 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Borneo Airways Limited, Kuching and Harper, Gilfillan (Borneo) Ltd. v The Commissioner of Inland Revenue Kuching (Consolidated Appeal) (Malaysia) [1969] UKPC 21 28 Jul 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Ivan Paraboo v Tom Crawford (Guyana) [1969] UKPC 18 28 Jul 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Sim Lim Investments Limited v The Attorney General of Singapore (Singapore) [1969] UKPC 19 28 Jul 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Ajapakse Pathurange Don Jayasena v The Queen (Ceylon) [1969] UKPC 22 29 Jul 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Viswanathar Kanagaratnam Subramaniam v Kanagaratnam Kadirgaman [1969] UKPC 23 6 Oct 1969 PC Commonwealth (Ceylon) [ Bailii ] Â Thiruman Palanimalay Veerappen v The Attorney General [1969] UKPC 25 6 Oct 1969 PC Commonwealth (Ceylon) [ Bailii ] Â Her Majesty'S Attorney General for Guyana v Cecile Nobrega (Guyana) [1969] UKPC 24 6 Oct 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Hussien v Chong Fook Kam [1970] AC 942; [1969] UKPC 26; [1970] 2 WLR 441; [1969] 3 All ER 1626 7 Oct 1969 PC Lord Devlin Police, Torts - Other, Commonwealth (Malaysia) The Board considered the propriety of an arrest by the police. Lord Devlin said: "An arrest occurs when a police officer states in terms that he is arresting or when he uses force to restrain the individual concerned. It occurs also when by words or conduct he makes it clear that he will, if necessary, use force to prevent the individual from going where he may want to go." In order to have a reasonable suspicion the officer need not have evidence amounting to a prima facie case: "Suspicion in its ordinary meaning is a state of conjecture or surmise where proof is lacking: "I suspect but I cannot prove". Suspicion arises at or near the starting point of an investigation, of which the obtaining of prima facie proof is the end. When such proof has been obtained, the police case is complete; it is ready for trial and passes on to its next stage. It is indeed desirable as a general rule that an arrest should not be made until the case is complete. But if arrest before that is forbidden, it could seriously hamper the police" and "There is another distinction between reasonable suspicion and prima facie proof. Prima facie proof consists of admissible evidence. Suspicion can take account matters that could not be put in evidence at all." 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Albion Insurance Co Ltd v Government Insurance Office (NSW) [1969] HCA 55; (1969) 121 CLR 342 31 Oct 1969 Barwick CJ, McTiernan, Kitto, Menzies and Windeyer J. Commonwealth, Insurance (High Court of Australia) Insurance - Contribution between insurers - Identity of risk insured - Loss covered by two policies - General nature and purpose of policies different - Extent of rights and liabilities created under policies different - Workers' compensation policy with indemnity extended to include employer's common law liability - Motor vehicle third party policy covering employer's liability to employee arising out of use of motor vehicle. Kitto J said: " 'a principle applicable at law no less than in equity, is that persons who are under co-ordinate liabilities to make good one loss (eg sureties liable to make good a failure to pay the one debt) must share the burden pro rata': the object being, as Hamilton J stated in American Surety Co of New York v Wrightson (1910) 103 LT 663: 'to put people who have commonly guaranteed or commonly insured in the same position as if the principal creditor or the assured had pursued his remedies rateably among them instead of doing as he is entitled to do, exhausting them to suit himself against one or other of them.'" 1 Citers [ Austlii ] Â Tan Chye Choo and Others v Chong Kew Moi (Malaysia) [1969] UKPC 27 6 Nov 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Maloney Gordon v The Queen (Jamaica) [1969] UKPC 29 1 Dec 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Pattini Kuttige Jokeenu Nonis v Horatalpedi Durayalage Peththa Alias Peththa Veda and Another (Ceylon) [1969] UKPC 28 2 Dec 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Noel Patrick Burns v The General Medical Council (The Disciplinary Committee of The General Medical Council) [1969] UKPC 30 4 Dec 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Chelliah Kodeeswaran v The Attorney General of Ceylon (Ceylon) [1969] UKPC 34 11 Dec 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Donald Jason Ranaweera v Claude Bertram Emmanuel Wickramsinghe (Ceylon) [1969] UKPC 31 11 Dec 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â Donald Jason Ranaweera v R. Ramachandran and Others (Ceylon) [1969] UKPC 32 11 Dec 1969 PC Commonwealth [ Bailii ] Â The Loan Investment Corporation of Australia Limited v Bonner [1969] UKPC 33 11 Dec 1969 PC Commonwealth New Zealand [ Bailii ] Â
		Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.

swarb.co.uk - law index

Commonwealth - From: 1960 To: 1969