Precedents and Famous Cases Flashcards
Bushell’s Case (1670)
Established the independence of the jury affirming that jurors cannot be punished for their verdict.
Entick v Carrington (1765)
Asserted the protection of private property against state intrusion without legal justification laying the groundwork for civil liberties.
https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/entick-v-carrington-1765.php
R v Dudley and Stephens (1884)
A seminal case on the legal limits of necessity as a defense to murder emphasizing the value of human life in legal terms.
Donoghue v Stevenson (1932)
Founded modern negligence law by establishing the principle that manufacturers owe a duty of care to consumers.
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (1893)
Clarified the principles of contract law particularly the requirements for offer acceptance and consideration.
R v Brown (1993)
The Spanner Case
A key case in criminal law concerning the limits of consent in cases of bodily harm.
R (Factortame Ltd) v Secretary of State for Transport (1990)
Highlighted the supremacy of European Union law over national law leading to significant constitutional implications.
Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority (1985)
Established the “Gillick competence” concerning minors ability to consent to medical treatment without parental approval.
The test proposed by Lord Scarman posits that a minor will be able to consent to treatment if they demonstrate “sufficient understanding and intelligence to understand fully what is proposed” ([1986] AC 112, 187[D]). The test is now often referred to as ‘Gillick competence’ and is an integral aspect of medical and family law.
https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/gillick-v-west-norfolk.php
Airedale NHS Trust v Bland (1993)
Addressed end-of-life decisions recognizing the legality of withdrawing life-sustaining treatment in certain circumstances.
https://www.lawteacher.net/cases/airedale-nhs-trust-v-bland.php
R v R (1991)
Overturned the historical legal principle that a husband could not be guilty of raping his wife affirming that marital rape is a criminal offense.
Costa vs ENEL 1964
the Court declared the supremacy of European law, thus requiring national courts to resolve conflicts between European law and national law in favour of the domestic application of European law.
Pepper V Hart 1992
Following the decision in Pepper v Hart [1993] AC 593, if primary legislation is ambiguous or obscure the courts may in certain circumstances take account of statements made in Parliament by Ministers or other promoters of a Bill in construing that legislation. Previously, using Hansard in this way would have been considered a breach of Parliamentary privilege.
Edgerton vs Harding 1975
Example of a successful claim resting on the principle of Custom
“by reason of the fact that the defendant and his predecessors in title have enjoyed the right to have the plaintiff’s land fenced against cattle put on the said common from time immemorial and by virtue of a grant by deed made by all necessary parties which has since been accidentally lost or destroyed. Further or alternatively the plaintiff has enclosed common land as topart of the garden of Sprat’s Cottage”
In Conway v Rimmer (1968)
, the House of Lords unanimously overruled Duncan v Cammell Laird and Co (1942).
THE FIRST TIME THAT THE PRACTISE STATEMENT CAME INTO EFFECT IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS
(legal skills, page 159)
Esso vs Commissioners of customs and Excise 1967
an example of a case that is not legally binding due to having an unclear ratio
