Site icon swarb.co.uk

Shackleton v Swift: CA 1913

The Act gave special protection to officers and others acting under its powers in cases where, although they might have misconstrued the Act, and although they might have done things which they had no jurisdiction to do, they had acted in good faith and in a reasonable manner. The burden on a defendant before obtaining a summary restraint of a plaintiff’s case as an abuse of process is necessarily a severe one.

Citations:

[1913] 2 KB 302

Statutes:

Lunacy Act, 1890 330

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedGoldsmith v Sperrings Ltd CA 1977
Claims for Collateral Purpose treated as abuse
The plaintiff commenced proceedings for damages for libel and an injunction against the publishers, the editors and the main distributors of Private Eye. In addition, he issued writs against a large number of other wholesale and retail distributors . .
CitedHays Plc v Hartley QBD 17-May-2010
Mr Hartley operated a news agency, and provided to the publisher of the Sunday Mirror, MGN Ltd, allegations of racism that had been levelled at the claimant company by former employees. The allegations were reported in an article headed ”KKK . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.186024

Exit mobile version