JD CASES + ACTS Flashcards
R v Howe
duress is not a valid defense for the crime of murder
R v Gotts
defense of duress is not available for attempted murder
used r v howe
Donoghue v Stevenson
An original precedent was created where the court created a brand new tort of negligence.
Grant v Australian Knitting Mills
followed donoghue v stevenson the manufacturer also owed a duty of care to the consumer
R v R
the Court of Appeal decided to make rape within marriage illegal
Anderton v Ryan
The Court overruled Anderton because they felt that they had made a serious error in the original decision
R v Taylor
There is also a 4th exception for the criminal division. This exception is when the law has been misapplied or misunderstood
Wagon mound
the PC decided the remoteness test for negligence – this test has since been adopted in UK law too.
R v Betham
was a UK case that chose to follow the Canadian case of R v Sloan about possession of firearms.
R v Sloan
R v Betham followed it
Rose and Frank v Crompton bros
most judges in the CoA decided that there was a contract, but one judge felt there should not be.
dissenting judgement
Jones v Sosss
the court acknowledged that the decision in Re Dowling was wrong, but kept it anyway for the sake of certainty.
R v Shivpuri
R v Shivpuri was able to overrule Anderton v Ryan, as there was a serious error that needed to be corrected quickly
Re Dowling
the decision in Re Dowling was wrong, but kept it anyway for the sake of certainty
Re J
the judge could not figure out what the ratio was and so had no idea what decision he was meant to be making.
Meritt v Meritt
Merritt was a written agreement between separated spouses.
which was distinguished from Balfour v Balfour
Balfour v Balfour
distinguished meritt v meritt
there was a verbal agreement between a couple living together
R v Hasan
the Court of Appeal in R v Hasan decided that self-induced duress was only when D knew what type of crime he would be forced to commit. But the House of Lords in R v Hasan reversed this and said self-induced duress was whenever D should have expected violence and that it did not matter if he knew what he would be forced to do.
3 exceptions from the COA binding themselves
Young v BAC
- there are conflicting decisions in past CoA cases, then the court can choose which decision it will reject.
- The Supreme Court make a decision which goes against the CoA’s precedent, they are bound to follow the higher court’s decision rather than their own.
- if the decision is made ‘per incuriam’, meaning ‘by mistake’
WHATS THE 1966 Practice statement
The Supreme Court can overrule itself using the 1966 Practice statement
