law Flashcards
case studies
1
Q
Esso v Commissioners for Customs and Excise (1976)
A
Does Esso have to pay purchase tax on the World Cup coins it gave away with its petrol?
- no more than 2 judges delivered similar ratios on any point
- judges reached the same decision but for different reasons
- in such a situation, a later court is permitted to decide that there is discernible ratio and therefore it will not be binding on future courts
2
Q
R (Rogers) v Swindon NHS Trust (2006)
A
- Rogers applied for funding of unlicensed drug to treat terminal breast cancer
- refused by the NHS as the case wasn’t deemed exceptional.
- Court of Appeal ruled this as unreasonable, and therefore unlawful- Trust had no clear reasons.
3
Q
Food Protection (Emergency Provisions) Order 1986
A
- came into affect 2hours after it was made and laid before Parliament
- prohibited the movement or slaughter of any sheep thought to have been affected by radioactive fallout from the Chernobyl incident
4
Q
Cableways Installations Regulation 2004
A
required technical knowledge of cablecars, drag lifts and ski lifts
5
Q
Air Navigation Order 1995
A
- followed 3 months later by Air Navigation (No.2) Order
- revoked and replaced the earlier order
- made expressly “to remedy defects and printing errors”
6
Q
Afghanistan (UN Sanction) 2001
A
- made it illegal to supply funds to Osama Bin Laden
7
Q
Austin v Southwark London Borough Council
A
Lord Hope established that the Supreme Court can use the Practice Statement after being renamed
8
Q
Donoghue v Stevenson
A
- decomposed snail in ginger beer- consumer suffered personal injury as a result
- Lord Atkin established duty of care to manfuacturer
- neighbour principle and negligence
9
Q
Hunter v Canary Wharf
A
- erection of Canary Wharf tower interfered with TV signal to Hunter in nearby block of flats
- sued in tort of nuisance
- distinguished Bridlington Relay v Yorkshire Electricity Board as case lost signal through electrical interference rather than a presence of a building
- Hunter won
10
Q
Merritt v Merritt
A
- distinguished Balfour v Balfour
- both husbands living separately and promised to send money, and didn’t
- Balfour’s were still together, therefore it was seen as a domestic disagreement and not intended to be legally binding
- Merritt’s were separated, therefore the promise was seen as intending to be legally binding
11
Q
Coltman v Bibby Tankers
A
- Coltman’s husband died when a ship crashed and sank
- sued under Employer’s Liability (Defective Equipment) Act 1969
- Definition of equipment did not include a ship
- Purposive judge ignored this and Coltman won, claiming a ship to be equipment
12
Q
R v (Registrar General Exparte Smith)
A
- Smith murderer, denied information to find his birth mother
- adopted person will obtain birth certificate if over 18 and applies in the correct manner
- purposive judge said that the law did not consider criminals/murderers
13
Q
Royal College of Nursing v DHSS 1981
A
- Abortion Act 1967: must be a ‘registered medical practitioner’ to carry out an abortion
- College used nurses
- Mischief rule judge said that the reason for the remedy was for abortions to be carried out safely by a trained professional. didn’t get sued
14
Q
Re Sigsworth 1935
A
- Administration of Estates Act 1925
- Sigsworth killed his mother she died intestate
- Act states that money goes to remaining spouse or issue
- Judge modified law to include other relatives
15
Q
LNER v Berriman
A
- no one supervised Berriman whilst oiling the tracks
- he was crushed by a train
- LNER wouldn’t compensate wife, as law stated in order for a watchman to be required workmen must be ‘repairing or relaying tracks’
- no compensation - literal rule judge
