ELS - Case Studies

Question 1

British Railways Board v Pickin

Answer 1

1974
- An example of parliamentary supremacy
- “A challenge cannot be made to an Act of Parliament even if there was fraud”

Question 2

Aylesbury Mushroom case

Answer 2

1972
- An example of delegated legislation being ultra vires
- Requirement to consult upon which he did not

Question 3

R v Secretary of State for Education and Employment, ex parte National Union of Teachers

Answer 3

2000
- Example of delegated legislation being ultra vires
- S.I set conditions that were beyond the powers given under the Education Act 1996

Question 4

Whiteley v Chappell

Answer 4

1868
- An example of a case whereby the literal rule was applied
- Defendant voted under the name of a deceased person, however “any person entitled to vote” does not in its literal sense include a dead person

Question 5

London & North Eastern Railway Co. v Berriman

Answer 5

1946
- An example of a case whereby the literal rule was applied
- Railway workers death was not entitled to compensation as the Act stated a look-out man should be provided for men working or near the railway line “for the purposes of relaying or repairing” however the man was maintaining and therefore was not in the literal sense entitled to a look-out man

Question 6

Adler v George

Answer 6

1964
- An example of a case whereby the narrow approach of the golden rule was applied
- Defendants had obstructed HM Forces actually inside of the prohibited place rather than “in the vicinity” of it
- The divisional court ruled this was absurd and that the words should be read as “in or in the vicinity of”

Question 7

Re Sigsworth

Answer 7

1935
- An example of a case whereby the wider approach of the golden rule was applied
- A son murdered his mother to inherit her estate, there was no ambiguity amongst the words of the Act however the court was not prepared to allow a murderer to benefit from his crime

Question 8

Smith v Hughes

Answer 8

1960
- An example of a case whereby the mischief rule was applied
- Women had been soliciting men by calling to them or tapping on their windows and argued they weren’t guilty as they were not literally “in a street or public place” however the court decided they were guilty

Question 9

Eastbourne Borough Council v Stirling

Answer 9

2000
- An example of a case whereby the mischief rule was applied
- A taxi driver was charged with “plying for hire in any street” without a license, despite being parked on a taxi rank on the station forecourt, not the street.
- A reference was made to Smith v Hughes

Question 10

Royal College of Nursing v DHSS

Answer 10

1981
- An example of a case whereby the mischief rule was applied

Question 11

R v Registrar-General, ex parte Smith

Answer 11

1990
- An example of a case whereby the purposive approach was used
- A refusal to give birth certificate to a convicted, mentally ill, criminal

Question 12

R (on the application of Quintavalle) v Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority

Answer 12

2003
- An example of a case whereby the purposive approach was used
- Considered embryos produced through CNR were covered by the 1990 Act

Question 13

Pepper v Hart

Answer 13

1993
- House of Lords relaxed the rule of gatekeeping Hansard, and therefore it could be used in a limited way
- Where the words of the Act are ambiguous or obscure or lead to an absurdity

Question 14

Balfour v Balfour & Merritt v Merritt

Answer 14

Balfour (1919) & Merritt (1971)
- Examples of distinguishing between two cases
- A difference in the legitimacy of contractual binding

Question 15

Bushell’s Case

Answer 15

1670
- A case highlighting the independence of the jury
- Establishes that the jury are the sole arbiters of fact and the judge cannot challenge their decision
- Trial judge tried to tamper with jury decision by restricting food/drink and sending them to prison with a fine, on appeal it was found that the jurors could not be punished for their verdict

Question 16

R v McKenna

Answer 16

1960
- A case highlighting the independence of the jury
- Judge threatened jury that if they didn’t make a decision in 10 minutes they would be locked up, this rushed their verdict (of guilty) and it was quashed on appeal

Question 17

R v Abdroikof, R v Green and R v Williamson

Answer 17

2007
- House of Lords considered appeals where a police officer or prosecutor had been one of the jury members
- A policer office on the jury having worked in the same station as a police officer giving evidence for the prosecution was a risk of bias

Question 18

Pointing’s case

Answer 18

1984
- Jury equity
- Case shows that jurors are not bound to follow the precedent of past cases or even Acts of Parliament and do not have to give reasons for their verdict
- Jury refused to convict a civil servant despite the judge ruling there was no defence

Question 19

Mendoza v Ghaidan

Answer 19

2002
- The effect of the Human Rights Act 1998
- Rent Act allowed unmarried partners to succeed to the tenancy, House of Lords decided same sex partners did not have the right under the Act however Court of Appeal held it did as per conformation to the European Convention on Human Rights which forbids discrimination on the ground of gender

Question 20

Fisher v Bell

Answer 20

1960
- An example of a case whereby the literal rule was applied
- Man displayed a knife with a price tag by the window however this was not considered an “offer for sale” as in contract law this is only an “invitation to treat”

Question 21

R v Randle and Pottle

Answer 21

1991
- Example of a perverse decision of the jury
- Defendants charged with helping a spy escape prison. Their prosecution occurred 25 years after the escape, they even wrote about what they had done yet the jury acquitted them

Question 22

R v Kronlid and others

Answer 22

1996
- Example of a perverse decision of the jury
- Defendants admitted they caused £1.5m damage to a plane. Pleaded not guilty on the basis they were preventing it from being sent to Indonesia where it would be used to attack the people of East Timor. The jury acquitted them.

Question 23

R v Mirza

Answer 23

2004
- An example of the secrecy of the jury
- House of Lords ruled that it could not inquire into discussions in a jury room
- A juror wrote to the defendant’s counsel alleging that from the start of the trial there had been a ‘theory’ that the use of an interpreter was a ‘ploy’. Juror also said that she had been shouted down when she objected and reminded her fellow jurors of the judge’s decisions