Results: 69

• R v Melin (Ozan)

  02 Apr 2019 [2019] EWCA Crim 557; [2019] QB 1063; [2019] 3 WLR 150; [2019] 2 Cr App R 8; [2019] WLR (D) 195, CA (Sir Brian Leveson P, Simler, Yip JJ)

  CRIME — Assault — Consent
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CRIME — Assault — Consent — Defendant administering injections of substance purporting to be Botox for cosmetic purposes to complainants — Complainants unaware that defendant not medically qualified — Whether defendant’s deception vitiating complainants’ consent — Offences against the Person Act 1861 (24 & 25 Vict c 100), s 20

  1 Case considered

  1 Statute considered

• R (KBR Inc) v Director of the Serious Fraud Office

  06 Sep 2018 [2018] EWHC 2368 (Admin); [2019] QB 675; [2019] 2 WLR 267; [2019] Lloyd's Rep FC 153; [2018] WLR (D) 562; [2019] Crim LR 50; [2018] ACD 128, DC (Gross LJ, Ouseley J)

  08 Apr 2019 (appn all) [2019] 1 WLR 3408, SC(E) ( Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore, Lord Briggs, Lord Sales JJSC)

  05 Feb 2021 [2021] UKSC 2; [2022] AC 519; [2021] 2 WLR 335; [2022] 1 All ER 97; [2021] 1 BCLC 651; [2021] WLR(D) 84, SC(E) (Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Briggs, Lady Arden, Lord Hamblen, Lord Stephens JJSC)

  Subsequent citations: 7.
  COMPANY — Fraud — Investigation
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  COMPANY — Fraud — Investigation — Director of Serious Fraud Office having power to require production of documents for fraud investigation — Whether power having extraterritorial application in respect of foreign company — Criminal Justice Act 1987 (c 38), s 2(3)

  5 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

• R v K (M) (R v Gega)

  28 Mar 2018 [2018] EWCA Crim 667; [2019] QB 86; [2018] 3 WLR 895; [2018] 3 All ER 566; [2018] 2 Cr App R 14; [2018] WLR (D) 203, CA (Lord Burnett of Maldon CJ, Andrews, Martin Spencer JJ)

  Subsequent citations: 7.
  CRIME — Practice — Statutory defence

  CRIME — Burden of proof — Statutory defence
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CRIME — Practice — Statutory defence — Whether evidential or legal burden of proving defence falling on defendant — Modern Slavery Act 2015, s 45

  CRIME — Burden of proof — Statutory defence — Defence to criminal charges for victims of human trafficking — Whether defendant under evidential or legal burden in relation to elements of defence — Modern Slavery Act 2015 (c 30), s 45

  2 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

• R v Kurtz (Emma-Jane)

  10 Dec 2018 [2018] EWCA Crim 2743; [2019] QB 1195; [2019] 2 WLR 1509; [2019] 1 Cr App R 19; [2018] WLR (D) 753, CA (Macur LJ, Julian Knowles J, Judge Wall QC)

  CRIME — Person lacking capacity — Wilful neglect
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CRIME — Person lacking capacity — Wilful neglect — Defendant having unregistered enduring power of attorney over deceased — Deceased dying in squalor after refusing medical treatment and defendant failing to seek medical treatment for her — Defendant charged with wilful neglect of deceased — Judge ruling Crown not required to prove lack of capacity of deceased — Judge failing to direct jury about deceased’s capacity in summing up — Whether offence committed if enduring power of attorney not registered with Public Guardian — Whether defendant wilfully neglecting capacitous donor of enduring power of attorney in respect of donor’s personal welfare — Mental Capacity Act 2005 (c 9), s 44(1)(b), Sch 4, paras 4, 13

  CRIME — Person lacking capacity — Wilful neglect — Defendant charged with wilful neglect of person who had granted her enduring power of attorney — Whether requirement for enduring power of attorney to have been registered — Whether requirement that neglected person lacking capacity — Mental Capacity Act 2005 (c 9), s 44(1)(b)(2), Sch 4, para 2(1)

  1 Case considered

  1 Statute considered

• Bokova v Associated Newspapers Ltd

  31 Jul 2018 [2018] EWHC 2032 (QB); [2019] QB 861; [2019] 2 WLR 232; [2018] WLR(D) 502, QBD (Nicklin J)

  Subsequent citations: 20.
  DEFAMATION — Libel — Meaning of words

  DEFAMATION — Libel — Meaning
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  DEFAMATION — Libel — Meaning of words — Claimant bringing libel proceedings in respect of news articles — Defendant relying on defence of truth — Preliminary ruling as to meaning of articles — Defendant amending defence to alter meanings it sought to prove true and related particulars of truth — Whether entitled to plead meanings at variance with meaning found by court on preliminary ruling — Whether entitled to add further meaning as “common sting” of articles — Defamation Act 2013 (c 26), s 2

  DEFAMATION — Libel — Meaning of words — Claimant bringing libel proceedings in respect of news articles — Court’s preliminary ruling as to meaning of articles — Defendant amending defence to alter meanings it sought to prove true — Whether entitled to plead meanings at variance with meaning found by court on preliminary ruling — Whether entitled to add further meaning as common sting of articles — Defamation Act 2013 (c 26), s 2

  DEFAMATION — Libel — Meaning — Claimant bringing libel proceedings in respect of news articles — Court’s preliminary ruling as to meaning of articles — Defendant amending defence to alter meanings it sought to prove true — Whether entitled to plead meanings at variance with meaning found by court on preliminary ruling — Whether entitled to add further meaning as common sting of articles — Whether amendments to be struck out — Defamation Act 2013 (c 26), s 2

  1 Statute considered

• Alseran v Ministry of Defence

  14 Dec 2017 [2017] EWHC 3289 (QB); [2019] QB 1251; [2018] 3 WLR 95; [2017] WLR(D) 837, QBD (Leggatt J)

  Subsequent citations: 13.
  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Sovereign immunity — Act of state

  HUMAN RIGHTS — Breach of Convention rights — Just satisfaction

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Tort — Applicable law
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Sovereign immunity — Act of state — Iraqi claimants arrested and detained by British armed forces acting abroad — Claims in tort for damages for unlawful detention and personal injury — Whether justiciable — Whether barred by doctrine of Crown act of state

  HUMAN RIGHTS — Breach of Convention rights — Just satisfaction — Iraqi claimants arrested and detained by British armed forces acting abroad — Whether initial or subsequent detention breaching claimants’ Convention rights to liberty — Whether treatment during arrest or detention breaching claimants’ Convention rights not to be subject to ill-treatment — Whether court to permit claims brought outside limitation period — Proper approach to assessment of compensation for breaches of Convention rights — Human Rights Act 1998 (c 42), ss 6(1), 7(5), Sch 1, Pt I, arts 3, 5

  CONFLICT OF LAWS — Tort — Applicable law — Iraqi claimants arrested and detained by British armed forces acting abroad — Claims in tort for damages for unlawful detention and personal injury — Whether arrest or detention unlawful — Whether claims brought outside limitation period — Whether court to extend time for bringing claims — Foreign Limitation Periods Act 1984 (c 16), ss 1(1), 2(1)(2) — Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995 (c 42), s 11(1)

  6 Case(s) considered

  3 Statutes considered
• R (D) v Parole Board (R (Mayor of London) v Parole Board, R (News Group Newspapers Ltd) v Parole Board, R (DSD) v Parole Board, R (News Group Newspapers Ltd) v Parole Board and another)

  28 Mar 2018 [2018] EWHC 694 (Admin); [2019] QB 285; [2018] 3 WLR 829; [2018] 3 All ER 417; [2018] WLR (D) 195, DC (Sir Brian Leveson P, Jay, Garnham JJ)

  Subsequent considerations : 1 positive; 1 neutral. Subsequent citations: 39.
  PRISONS — Prisoners’ rights — Release on licence
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  PRISONS — Prisoners’ rights — Release on licence — Prisoner convicted of series of sexual offences committed whilst working as licensed taxi driver in London — Prisoner serving indeterminate sentence of imprisonment for public protection — Parole Board directing prisoner’s release on licence following expiry of minimum term — Prisoner’s victims and Mayor of London seeking judicial review of decision on grounds of irrationality — Whether mayor having standing to bring claim — Whether release decision irrational — Whether Parole Board unlawfully failing to make further inquiries into circumstances surrounding prisoner’s account of offending

  PRISONS — Prisoners’ rights — Release on licence — Prisoner serving indeterminate sentence of imprisonment with minimum term for public protection — Parole Board rule prohibiting making public information about its proceedings — Whether authorised by enabling statute by necessary implication — Whether ultra vires — Whether open justice principle applying to Parole Board proceedings — Criminal Justice Act 2003 (c 44), s 239(5) — Parole Board Rules 2016 (SI 2016/1041), r 25

  5 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

  1 Statutory Instrument considered

• Toms v Ruberry

  24 Nov 2017 [2017] EWHC 2970 (QB); [2018] 1 WLR 1138; [2017] WLR (D) 783, QBD (Dingemans J)

  08 Feb 2019 [2019] EWCA Civ 128; [2019] QB 937; [2019] 2 WLR 975; [2019] 3 All ER 170; [2019] WLR (D) 74, CA (Richards, Holroyde, Nicola Davies LJJ)

  LANDLORD AND TENANT — Forfeiture of lease — Re-entry
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  LANDLORD AND TENANT — Forfeiture of lease — Re-entry — Right of re-entry for breach of covenant not enforceable until landlord serving on tenant notice specifying particular breach — Landlord alleging tenant in breach of covenant and serving notice — Particular breach relied on not specified in notice — Particular breach relied on not yet occurring — Whether right of re-entry arising — Whether notice valid — Law of Property Act 1925 (15 & 16 Geo 5, c 20), s 146(1)

  LANDLORD AND TENANT — Forfeiture of lease — Re-entry — Landlord’s right of re-entry or foreiture under lease for tenant’s breach of covenant — Statute providing such right not enforceable until landlord serving notice on tenant specifying breach of covenant complained of — Whether notice valid if given before contractual right of re-entry otherwise enforceable — Law of Property Act 1925 (15 & 16 Geo 5, c 20), s 146(1)

  5 Case(s) considered

  1 Statute considered

• Birmingham City Council v Jones

  11 Oct 2016 (unreported), QBD (Burton J)

  23 May 2018 [2018] EWCA Civ 1189; [2019] QB 521; [2018] 3 WLR 1695; [2018] 2 Cr App R 23; [2018] WLR (D) 312, CA (Sir Brian Leveson P, Underhill, Irwin LJJ)

  30 Mar 2022 (appn all) [2022] 1 WLR 2276, SC(E) (Lord Briggs, Lord Stephens, Lady Rose JJSC)

  Subsequent citations: 1.
  INJUNCTION — Gang-related violence — Exercise of statutory jurisdiction
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  INJUNCTION — Gang-related violence — Exercise of statutory jurisdiction — Statutory power to grant injunction in restraint of gang-related violence — Whether involving determination of criminal charge — Appropriate standard of proof — Whether scheme compatible with Convention right to fair trial — Human Rights Act 1998 (c 42), Sch 1, Pt I, art 6 — Policing and Crime Act 2009 (c 26), s 34 (as amended by Serious Crime Act 2015 (c 9), s 51) — Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 (c 12), s 1

  6 Case(s) considered

  3 Statutes considered

• Sheffield City Council v Brooke

  21 Jun 2018 [2018] EWHC 1540 (QB); [2019] QB 48; [2018] 3 WLR 791; [2018] WLR(D) 384, QBD (Males J)

  Subsequent citations: 1.
  CONTEMPT OF COURT — Committal order — Civil contempt
  Expand

  Case index catchwords

  CONTEMPT OF COURT — Committal order — Civil contempt — Defence of another — Application for committal of defendant protester for breach of undertaking not to enter safety zones erected around trees intended for felling — Defendant claiming to have entered safety zone to defend another protester being assaulted by security staff — Whether defence to committal proceedings — Whether defendant to establish both genuine and reasonable belief that action in defence of another necessary — Whether defence precluded where police officers present

  CONTEMPT OF COURT — Committal order — Civil contempt — Defence of another — Application to commit defendant protester to prison for breach of undertaking not to enter safety zones erected around trees intended for felling — Defendant claiming to have entered safety zone to defend another protester believing that she was being assaulted by security staff — Whether providing defence to application to commit — Whether civil or criminal test applying — Whether defence precluded where police officers present

  4 Case(s) considered