Click the case name for better results:

Regina v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and another, ex parte European Roma Rights Centre and others: HL 9 Dec 2004

Extension oh Human Rights Beyond Borders The appellants complained that the system set up by the respondent where Home Office officers were placed in Prague airport to pre-vet applicants for asylum from Romania were dsicriminatory in that substantially more gypsies were refused entry than others, and that it was contrary to the obligations of the … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and another, ex parte European Roma Rights Centre and others: HL 9 Dec 2004

A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004

The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they did. A British subject, who was suspected in the exact same way, and there were … Continue reading A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004

Brotherston and Others v The Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 3 Feb 2012

Four drivers said that the use of approved speed cameras for evidential purposes was unlawful. They argued that the cameras used were not ‘of a description specified’ under an Order. Held: The appeals failed. The different speed trap mechanisms were lawful and specified wihin the regulations. The court discussed the stages involved in the designation … Continue reading Brotherston and Others v The Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 3 Feb 2012

Regina v Looseley (orse Loosely); Attorney General’s Reference No 3 of 2000: HL 25 Oct 2001

Police Entrapment is no defence to Criminal Act The defendant complained of his conviction for supplying controlled drugs, saying that the undercover police officer had requested him to make the supply. Held: It was an abuse of process for the police to go so far as to incite a crime. Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead said: … Continue reading Regina v Looseley (orse Loosely); Attorney General’s Reference No 3 of 2000: HL 25 Oct 2001

Hatton, Regina (on the Application of) v Devon and Cornwall Constabulary: Admn 4 Feb 2008

The defendant sought judicial review, on a renewed application, to challenge the decision to issue a speeding fine, and in the alternative that he had failed to identify the driver as required. The defendant had supplied the information but under a condition not allowing that information to be used for prosecution, citing Funke. Held: The … Continue reading Hatton, Regina (on the Application of) v Devon and Cornwall Constabulary: Admn 4 Feb 2008

Swales v Cox: CA 1981

Police officers had entered a house in pursuit of a suspected burglar. Held: It is a condition of any lawful breaking of premises that the person seeking entry has demanded and been refused entry by the occupier. Donaldson LJ said: ‘it is conceded in this case that (the trial judge) correctly analysed the position at … Continue reading Swales v Cox: CA 1981

Regina v Legal Aid Board ex parte Kaim Todner (a Firm of Solicitors): CA 10 Jun 1998

Limitation on Making of Anonymity Orders A firm of solicitors sought an order for anonymity in their proceedings against the LAB, saying that being named would damage their interests irrespective of the outcome. Held: The legal professions have no special part in the law as a party to entitle a court to allow a solicitors … Continue reading Regina v Legal Aid Board ex parte Kaim Todner (a Firm of Solicitors): CA 10 Jun 1998

Griffiths v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 22 Mar 2007

Photographic output was part of device process The defendant appealed his conviction for speeding, complaining at the technical accuracy of the Gatso camera used, and the use of photographs developed from pictures taken by the cameras. Held: The photographs used for analysis were records produced by a prescribed device, even though not directly produced: ‘The … Continue reading Griffiths v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 22 Mar 2007

White v White and The Motor Insurers Bureau: HL 1 Mar 2001

The requirements as to the extent of knowledge in the mind of a passenger sufficient to defeat a claim against the Motor Insurers Bureau, of the driver’s lack of insurance, was actual knowledge. The rules implemented a European Directive which required knowledge of the absence of insurance, and must be interpreted accordingly so as to … Continue reading White v White and The Motor Insurers Bureau: HL 1 Mar 2001

Bancoult, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs: Admn 11 Jun 2013

The claimant, displaced from the Chagos Archipelago, challenged a decision by the respondent to create a no-take Marine Protected Area arround the island which would make life there impossible if he and others returned. The respondent renewed his objection to the use of leaked materials, saying that this would be a breach of the Official … Continue reading Bancoult, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs: Admn 11 Jun 2013

Bannister, Regina v: CACD 28 Jul 2009

The defendant appealed his conviction for dangerous driving. As a police officer he had driven at over 110 mph on a motorway in the wet, lost control and crashed. He said that the fact that he had undertaken the police advanced drivers’ course should be taken into account in deciding whether he had been driving … Continue reading Bannister, Regina v: CACD 28 Jul 2009

McTear v Imperial Tobacco Ltd: OHCS 31 May 2005

The pursuer sought damages after her husband’s death from lung cancer. She said that the defenders were negligent in having continued to sell him cigarettes knowing that they would cause this. Held: The action failed. The plaintiff had not proved that the smoking of cigarettes was the cause of the lung cancer, and it was … Continue reading McTear v Imperial Tobacco Ltd: OHCS 31 May 2005

Iaciofano v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 15 Jul 2010

The defendant appealed against his conviction for speeding, saying that the device used to measure his speed was not approved. The only evidence relied on was that the officer said it had been installed in many police vehicles. Held: The magistrates had not been entitled to take judicial notice of such an opinion. Though a … Continue reading Iaciofano v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 15 Jul 2010