ELS HOMEWORK Flashcards
LNER v Berriman (1946)
LNER v Berriman (1946) involved a railway worker who was killed while performing maintenance on the tracks, leading to a dispute over whether his widow was entitled to compensation under the Fatal Accidents Act. The House of Lords ruled that compensation was not payable because the worker was not “in the course of his employment” at the time of the accident, as he was not engaged in a “repair” operation as defined by the Act.
Re Sigsworth (1935)
In Re Sigsworth (1935), the court addressed the issue of whether a son who murdered his mother could inherit her estate under the law of intestacy. The court ruled that allowing the murderer to inherit would be contrary to public policy, thus preventing him from benefiting from his wrongdoing.
Smith v Hughes (1960)
In Smith v Hughes (1960), the court examined a case where a seller of a house failed to disclose that it was situated on a busy street, leading the buyer to claim misrepresentation. The court ruled in favor of the buyer, emphasizing that the seller’s failure to inform constituted a misleading act, as the buyer was misled about the property’s true nature.
Eastbourne County Council v Stirling (2000)
In Eastbourne County Council v Stirling (2000), the court considered whether a local authority was liable for injuries sustained by a pedestrian due to a pothole on a public highway. The ruling established that the council was found negligent for failing to maintain the road, as it had a duty to ensure the safety of users.
R v Registrar General ex parte Smith (1990)
In R v Registrar General ex parte Smith (1990), the court addressed the issue of whether an individual could obtain a copy of their birth certificate despite being convicted of murder. The court ruled that the Registrar General had the discretion to refuse the request, prioritizing the protection of the public and the integrity of the legal system over the individual’s rights to access their personal information.
