Site icon swarb.co.uk

Williams v Taylor: 1829

No action will lie for the institution of legal proceedings, however malicious, unless they have been instituted without reasonable and probable cause. Tindal CJ said: ‘Malice alone is not sufficient, because a person actuated by the plainest malice may none the less have a justifiable reason for prosecution.’

Judges:

Tindal CJ

Citations:

(1829) 6 Bing 183

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedSinclair v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire and British Telecommunications Plc CA 12-Dec-2000
The claimant had been prosecuted, but the charge was dismissed as an abuse of process. He now appealed a strike out of his civil claim for damages for malicious prosecution.
Held: The appeal failed. The decision to dismiss the criminal charge . .
CitedHowarth v Gwent Constabulary and Another QBD 1-Nov-2011
The claimant alleged malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office against the defendant. He had been charged with perverting the course of justice. He had worked for a firm of solicitors specialising in defending road traffic prosecutions. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.196689

Exit mobile version