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.  














Constitutional - From: 2003 To: 2003

This page lists 22 cases, and was prepared on 20 May 2019.

 
Society Promoting Environmental Conservation v Canada (Attorney-General) (2003) 228 DLR (4th) 693
2003

Evans JA
Litigation Practice, Constitutional
(Canada - Federal Court of Appeal) The court considered the exercise of its ability to declare a statute invalid: "the more serious the public inconvenience and injustice likely to be caused by invalidating the resulting administrative action, including the frustration of the purposes of the legislation, public expense and hardship to third parties, the less likely it is that a court will conclude that legislative intent is best implemented by a declaration of invalidity."
1 Citers



 
 Matalulu v Director of Public Prosecutions; 2003 - [2003] 4 LRC 712
 
Director of Public Prosecutions of Jamaica v Mollison (No 2) Times, 27 January 2003; [2003] UKPC 6; Gazette, 20 March 2003; [2003] 2 WLR 1160
22 Jan 2003
PC
Bingham of Cornhill, Slynn of Hadley, Clyse, Hutton, Walker of Gestingthorpe LL
Constitutional, Criminal Sentencing, Commonwealth
(Jamaica ) The appellant had been convicted of murder as a youth. He was sentenced to be detained during Her Majesty's pleasure. The actual length of time to be served was decided by the Governor-General. The decision by the Governor was clearly a sentencing decision, and therefore properly fell to the courts. A decision by him would contravene the requirement of the separation of powers. The provisions under which this methods of dealing with the applicant were unconstitutional, and did not survive the 1962 Constitution. Despite a provision protecting certain regulations, this arrangement was fundamental to a constitution based upon the Westminster model, and the rule was not protected. The appellant was entitled to have the time of detention decided by a court.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ PC ]

 
 Regina (ZL and VL) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Lord Chancellor's Department; CA 24-Jan-2003 - [2003] 1 WLR 1230; Times, 30 January 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 25; Gazette, 20 March 2003; [2003] 1 All ER 1062; [2003] Imm AR 330; [2003] INLR 224
 
Crawford, Regardless Limited and Crawford v Financial Institutions Services Limited [2003] UKPC 12
6 Feb 2003
PC
Lord Hutton, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Scott of Foscote
Commonwealth, Constitutional, Contract
PC Jamaica - petition for special leave to appeal to Her Majesty in Council from a judgment of the Court of Appeal of Jamaica dated 31 July 2001. The petitioners are Donovan Crawford, Regardless Ltd and Alma Crawford, the defendants in the proceedings at trial and the appellants in the Court of Appeal.
1 Citers

[ PC ] - [ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
Perch, Dennie and Commissiong v The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago [2003] UKPC 17
20 Feb 2003
PC
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Steyn, Lord Hutton, Lord Millett, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
Commonwealth, Employment, Constitutional
PC (Trinidad and Tobago) The postal system had been transferred to a company. Employees complained that they had been public servants and had lost privileges associated with that employment, and provisions of the Act transferring their contracts were unconstitutional. Held: Employees of the new corporation were not holders of any public office and were not employed in the service of the Government in a civil capacity within the meaning of section 3(1) of the Constitution. The law recognised retirement as an appropriate means of leaving public service, and that option had been offerred. Abolition was also allowed, and therefore the transfer was not unconstitutional.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ PC ] - [ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
McWhirter and Gouriet, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2003] EWCA Civ 384
5 Mar 2003
CA
Laws LJ
Constitutional, Judicial Review
Application for leave to appeal against refusal of judicial review of decision to allow ratification of the Treaty of Nice. Held: Refused. The application concerned matters which were not justiciable. Laws LJ accepted the submission of the Secretary of State that "ratification is a step taken on the international plane, and is not governed by domestic law nor operative at the level of domestic law."
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Regina v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Quintavalle (on behalf of Pro-Life Alliance); HL 13-Mar-2003 - [2003] UKHL 13; Times, 14 March 2003; [2003] 2 WLR 692; [2003] 2 AC 687; (2003) 71 BMLR 209; [2003] 1 FCR 577; [2003] 2 All ER 113
 
Regina (Majead) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, Secretary of State for the Home Department Interested Party Times, 24 April 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 615; Gazette, 12 June 2003
1 Apr 2003
CA
Brooke, Hale, Wilson LJJ
Scotland, Jurisdiction, Immigration, Constitutional
The applicant had arrived in England to apply for asylum but had then been moved to Scotland. A decision of the adjudication officer in Scotland had been heard by the Immigration Appeal Tribunal sitting in London. The claimant sought a High Court review of that decision in London. Held: The review could only be conducted by the Court of Session. The considerations were not those of a private action as to forum conveniens, but had constitutional implications. Though some residual jurisdiction lay in London, this was not an exceptional case and was to be heard in Scotland. Parliament had made clear that the courts of Scotland should have ultimate responsibility in relation to appeals to the IAT from adjudicators in Scotland. Without deciding the point Brooke LJ noted that in a 'real emergency' the High Court might exercise jurisdiction over IAT decisions relating to appeals from adjudicators in Scotland but that would have to be a 'very exceptional case'.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Nicholls v London Borough of Greenwich [2003] EWCA Civ 416; Times, 21 April 2003
3 Apr 2003
CA
Lord Justice May, Lord Justice Mummery The President
Constitutional, Employment
The claimant had been employed by the respondent, and earned a pension. She challenged legislation which appeared to operate retrospectively to reduce that pension. The respondent argued that the amount agreed to be paid exceeded the maximum statutory amount, and that a payment made upon termination was not to an officer holding a position. Held: The promise of payment of a retirement gratuity was a term or condition of the contract appointing her to hold office as a school cleaner. It was a part of her employment package. That her contract was terminating did not mean it was not paid to her as a person holding office. Retrospectivity which appeared to take away a right should only be read from the clearest of words.
Superannuation Act 1972 7
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Coppard v The Commissioners of Customs and Excise, Lord Chancellor intervening [2003] EWCA Civ 631; Times, 11 April 2003; Gazette, 19 June 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 511; [2003] QB 1428; [2003] 3 All ER 351; [2003] 2 WLR 1618
9 Apr 2003
CA

Litigation Practice, Human Rights, Constitutional
The judge, a circuit judge who had been appointed a judge of the TCC, had adjudicated on the claimant's case in the High Court in the false belief that the appointment allowed him to do so. Held: The judge had not wilfully closed his eyes to the law, and his mistake was understandable. On established principle, the judge was a judge de facto. The true logic of the doctrine was not only that the acts were validated but also the office. Accordingly, the judge was a properly constituted court for Article 6 purposes.
Supreme Court Act 1981 68 - European Court of Human Rights 6(1)
1 Cites

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Regina (M) v Secretary of State for Health Times, 25 April 2003
16 Apr 2003
QBD
Maurice Kay J
Health, Human Rights, Constitutional
In the J T case the UK government had reached a friendly settlement under which it accepted that the United Kingdom law under sections 26 and 29 of the 1983 Act was an infringement of a patients human rights. It had been accepted that the legislation would need amendment, to allow a detainee exercising his right to apply to court to choose a diferent family member as his representative, but that had not yet happened. Held: The right to make a declaration of incompatibility was discretionary, but the existence of a decision such as J T did not prevent a court exercising that discretion. The court made a declaration of incompatibility.
1 Cites


 
Easterbrook v The United Kingdom 48015/99; Times, 18 June 2003; [2003] ECHR 278; [2003] 37 EHHR 812
12 Jun 2003
ECHR

Criminal Sentencing, Constitutional, Human Rights
The prisoner was convicted of an armed robbery in which a policeman had been shot, and had been sentenced to life imprisonment. The judge set no tariff himself. The tariff was set by the Home Secretary, but only after some time. The discretionary life prisoner had been refused the right to make oral representations to the Lord Chief Justice upon him recommending the tariff he was to serve. Held: There had been a violation of Article 6.1 regarding the procedure adopted in fixing the applicant's tariff: "The Court would observe that the sentencing exercise carried out in criminal cases must necessarily be carried out by an independent and impartial tribunal, namely a court offering guarantees and procedure of a judicial nature. It was not a court that fixed the applicant's tariff in a public adversarial hearing and in the circumstances it is not sufficient to satisfy the fundamental principal relating the separation of powers that the member of the executive who issued the decision was guided by judicial opinion".
European Convention on Human Rights 6.1
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Worldlii ] - [ Bailii ]

 
 The Confederation of Passenger Transport UK v The Humber Bridge Board and the Secretary of State for Transport Local Government and the Regions; CA 25-Jun-2003 - [2003] EWCA Civ 1842; [2004] QB 310; Times, 16 July 2003

 
 Regina v Her Majesty's Attorney General ex parte Rusbridger and Another; HL 26-Jun-2003 - [2003] UKHL 38; Times, 27 June 2003; [2004] 1 AC 357

 
 Cullen v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (Northern Ireland); HL 10-Jul-2003 - Gazette, 18 September 2003; [2003] UKHL 39; [2003] 1 WLR 1763; [2004] 2 All ER 237; [2003] 1 WLR 1763; [2003] NI 375
 
Regina on the Application of Southall and Another v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2003] EWCA Civ 1002
14 Jul 2003
CA
Lord Justice Schiemann, Lord Justice Scott Baker
Constitutional, European
The claimant sought a declaration that the Treaty of Nice should not be ratified unless and until the consent of the people had been sought in a referendum. Silber J had refused permission to apply for judicial review. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The declarations sought were "unsuitable to be the subject of a court pronouncement". The question of whether or not a referendum should be held before Parliament passed the legislation necessary to incorporate the treaty was "a matter of political judgment and not for the courts."
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Kobler v Republik Osterreich Times, 03 October 2003; C-224/01; [2003] EUECJ C-224/01; [2004] QB 848; [2003] ECR I-10239
30 Sep 2003
ECJ

Constitutional
The claimant's claim had been presented to the Supreme Administrative Court in Austria, who had referred a question to the ECJ. Following the Schoning decision, the court withdrew the referral, and dismissed the claim. He now claimed damages from the state for the wrongful dismissal of his claim by the court. Held: It was for member states not to infringe European law. The state, including the mechanisms for implementing the law is to be seen as one entity. Where the state could be liable for failing properly to implement European law, so too could the courts of that country. Three conditions for entitlement existed: a private right had to have been infringed, it had to be sufficiently serious, and there must be a direct causal link betrween the breach and the loss.
ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling: Landesgericht für Zivilrechtssachen Wien - Austria. Equal treatment - Remuneration of university professors - Indirect discrimination - Length-of-service increment - Liability of a Member State for damage caused to individuals by infringements of Community law for which it is responsible - Infringements attributable to a national court.
EC Treaty 48
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Regina v G and R; HL 16-Oct-2003 - [2003] UKHL 50; Times, 17 October 2003; Gazette, 13 November 2003; [2003] 3 WLR 1060; [2004] 1 AC 1034; (2003) 167 JP 621; (2003) 167 JPN 955; [2004] 1 Cr App R 21; [2003] 4 All ER 765
 
Pilar Aida Rojas v Brian Berllaque [2003] UKHL 76; Times, 13 November 2003; [2003] UKPC 76; [2004] 1 WLR 201
10 Nov 2003
PC
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Millett, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
Constitutional, Human Rights, Discrimination, Criminal Practice
PC (Gibraltar) The system of selecting a criminal jury obliged men to be available for selection, but women could choose not to be on the role of jurors. The result was that jury lists and juries were almost entirely male. Held: (Majority) Since juries are chosen at random from jury lists, a non-discriminatory method of compilation of the jury lists is an essential ingredient of a fair trial by jury. This is inherent in the concept of a fair trial by an impartial jury. Fairness is achieved in the composition of a jury by random selection from a list which is itself fairly constituted. Section 19 of the Supreme Court Ordinance violates section 8 of the Constitution in so far as it discriminates between men and women regarding liability for jury service. There is a strong but rebuttable presumption that a jury acts impartially.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ PC ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Haroon Khan v The State [2005] 1 AC 374; [2003] UKPC 79; Times, 26 November 2003; Gazette, 15 January 2004
20 Nov 2003
PC
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Steyn, Lord Millett, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
Commonwealth, Crime, Constitutional
PC (Trinidad and Tobago) The appellant had been convicted of felony murder. He was one of four engaged in a robbery, where the victim received fatal injuries. Held: The felony murder rule had been re-introduced after it had been repealed as a side effect of abolishing the distinction between felonies and misdemeanours. The appellant now argued that the re-introduction of the rule was unconstitutional, as it was inconsistent with the presumption of innocence. "The presumption of innocence is perhaps the most fundamental principle underlying the administration of the criminal law. It places on the prosecution, fairly and squarely, the duty of proving guilt. But it does not control the ingredients of the offence which the prosecution must prove to establish guilt." The present case fell within that rule, and the new law was not unconstitutional. The appellant's sentence of death was however overturned under Roodal.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
Balkissoon Roodal v The State [2003] UKHL 78; Times, 26 November 2003; Gazette, 15 January 2004; [2004] 2 WLR 652; Gazette, 05 February 2004
20 Nov 2003
PC
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Steyn, Lord Millett, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
Constitutional, Criminal Sentencing, Commonwealth
(Trinidad and Tobago) The appellant challenged the automatic death sentence imposed upon him for murder. Held: There were conflicting constitutional provisions. Following Fisher, in the context of issues of capital sentences a wider view was required. The death penalty should no longer be read as mandatory. Legislation since 1976 meant that the court now had a ciscretion to impose imprisonment.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.