Case List - 123 PDF

Preview

Summary

123...

Description

Case name: Addie v Dumbreck (1929)

British Railway Board v Herrington (1972)

R v Howe (1987)

R v Shivpuri (1986)

Young v Bristol Aeroplane (1944)

Davis v Johnson (1978) R v Wilson (1997)

Facts: The defendant owned View Park Colliery which was situated in a field adjacent to a road. The defendant would often warn people off the land, but the attempts were not effective and no real attempt was made to ensure that people did not come onto the land. A six year old boy was electrocuted and suffered severe burns when he wondered from a play park onto a live railway line. The defendant was aware of a gap in the fence which had been present for several months. Howe & Bailey both aged 19 and Bannister aged 20, were acting under orders of Murray aged 35. Murray had driven them all to a public lavatory. Elgar was subjected to torture. Howe and Bannister took part in kicking and punching Elgar and were told they would succumb to similar treatment if they did not do as Murray ordered. Bailey strangled Elgar resulting in his death. D collected a suitcase which contained several packages of white powder which he admitted in police interview that he believed to be either heroin or cannabis but was in fact legal snuff. D claimed that he could not be found guilty in law of an impossible offence, because the substance was not a drug. The claimant was injured and received compensation. He then sought to recover again, alleging breach of statutory duty by his employers. This case concerned the interpretation of the Domestic Violence and Matrimonial Proceedings Act 1976. The defendant branded his wife on the buttocks with his initials.The defendant raised the defence of consent and the Court of Appeal allowed the defence as branding was similar to tattooing. The Court did not think that Mr or Mrs Wilson got sexual pleasure from the act, therefore, the case was different to R v Brown.

Decision & Comments: Trespassers who get injured are not able to claim for personal injury from the occupiers of the land.

Trespassers who get injured are able to claim for personal injury from the occupiers of the land. Overruled Addie v Dumbreck (1929) Duress cannot be used as a defence for murder. Practice Statement used. Overruled DPP v Lynch (1973).

Overruled Anderton v Ryan (1985) to rule you can be found guilty of an impossible crime. First time practice statement used. Court of Appeal should follow previous decisions except in 3 exceptions. Could not use the Hansard. Consent is a defence for tattooing and branding.

R v Brown and others (1994)

Balfour v Balfour (1919)

Merritt v Merritt (1971)

DOCTRINE COMMON LAW JUDGEMENT VERDICT

RATIO DECIDENDI

OBITER DICTA BINDING PRECENDENT PERSUASIVE PRECEDENT LAW REPORTS HIERARCHY OF THE

The defendants were homosexual sadomasochists who inflicted injuries amounting to ABH & GBH on each other. The defendants raised the defence of consent. A husband worked overseas and agreed to send maintenance payments to his wife. At the time of the agreement the couple were happily married. The relationship later soured and the husband stopped making the payments. The wife sought to enforce the agreement. A husband left his wife and went to live with another woman. There was £180 left owing on the house which was jointly owned by the couple. The husband signed an agreement whereby he would pay the wife £40 per month to enable her to meet the mortgage payments and if she paid all the charges in connection with the mortgage until it was paid off he would transfer his share of the house to her. When the mortgage was fully paid she brought an action for a declaration that the house belonged to her.

Court of Appeal & House of Lords decided that they could not raise the defence of consent A wife could not sue her husband for breach of contract for an agreement they made whilst they were married. An agreement made between a husband and wife after they were separated was considered to be a binding contract.

A single important rule or a set of rules that is widely followed in a field of law Common law is a body of unwritten laws based on legal precedents established by the courts A decision of a court adjudicating the rights of the parties to a legal action before it A jury's findings or conclusions on the factual issues presented by a case. Sometimes, the term also refers to the judge's resolution of issues in a bench trial. Literally the "rationale for the decision". The essential elements of a judgment which create binding precedent, and must therefore be followed by inferior courts. A judge's comments or observations, in passing, on a matter arising in a case before him which does not require a decision. Precedent that a court must abide by in its adjudication of a case. Precedent that a court may, but is not required to, rely on in deciding a case. A record of a judicial decision on a point of law which sets a precedent. A court hierarchy establishes which decisions are binding on which

COURTS

PRACTICE STATEMENT 1966 YOUNG EXCEPTIONS

SUPERIOR COURTS

INFERIOR COURTS

courts. There are some exceptions and complications to what follows but, in general and for most purposes, the higher up a court is in the hierarchy, the more authoritative its decisions. A statement passed by the House of Lords which allows them to change one of their previous decisions when ‘it appears right to do so’. The Court of Appeal should follow their own previous decisions but there are 3 exceptions: 1. Where there are two previous Court of Appeal decisions that conflict 2. Where there is a conflicting House of Lords decision 3. The previous decision was made per incuriam(carelessly or by mistake) The higher courts in English law, which include the High Court, the Court of Appeal, the Crown Court and the House of Lords. Their decisions act as precedents for the lower courts to follow. A court of limited jurisdiction, whose decisions do not act as binding precedents, including the County Court, Crown Court and the Magistrates’ Court....