Lord Advocate v Dumbarton District Council: HL 1989

The House was asked whether the Ministry of Defence was entitled to cone off a section of the A814 road without the permission of the roads authority under the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 or the local planning authority under the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1972.
Held: Before the Acts of Union, Scots law did not have the same presumption as English law that a statute was not binding on the Crown unless explicitly so made, and there were Scottish cases suggesting that the rule was rather different there. Lord Keith said that there were no rational grounds for adopting a different approach to the construction of statutes in Scotland and in England and that the modern English approach should prevail.
Lord Keith of Kinkel
[1990] 2 AC 580, [1990] 1 All ER 1, [1989] 3 WLR 1346
Scotland
Citing:
CitedAttorney General v Hancock 1940
The Crown could enforce a debt for unpaid income tax without the leave of the court, not being bound by the provisions of the Courts (Emergency Powers) Act 1939, which prohibited enforcement without leave. . .
CitedThe Province of Bombay v The Municipal Corporation of The City of Bombay and Another PC 10-Oct-1946
(Bombay) The Board considered whether the Crown was bound by section 222(1) and section 265 of the City of Bombay Municipal Act 1888, which in effect gave the Municipality power to carry water mains for the purposes of water supply through, across . .
CitedMadras Electric Supply Corp Ltd v Boarland House of Lords HL 11-Mar-1955
Income Tax, Schedule D – Balancing charge – Succession by Crown – Whether cessation provisions apply – Income Tax Act, 1918 (8 and 9 Geo. V, c. 40), Schedule D, Cases I and II, Rule 11 ; Finance Act, 1926 (16 and 17 Geo. V, c. 22), Section 32.
CitedThe British Broadcasting Corporation v Johns (HM Inspector of Taxes) CA 5-Mar-1964
The BBC claimed to be exempt from income tax. It claimed crown immunity as an emanation of the crown. The court had to decide whether the BBC was subject to judicial review.
Held: It is not a statutory creature; it does not exercise statutory . .

Cited by:
CitedBlack, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 19-Dec-2017
The Court was asked whether the Crown is bound by the prohibition of smoking in most enclosed public places and workplaces, contained in Chapter 1 of Part 1 of the Health Act 2006.
Held: However reluctantly, the claimant’s appeal was . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 May 2021; Ref: scu.651105