THE SUPREME COURT/HOL-Practise Statement Cases

Question 1

What/when was the first case use of the practise statement?

Answer 1

1968 Conway V Rimmer

Question 2

Describe the case of Conway V Rimmer 1968
(3)
-what did it involve?
-what was the case based on?
-why was it changed

Answer 2

• Involved only a technical point in discovery of documents
• Based on a misapprehension of the law
• Lower courts expressed their regrets of the precedent made by Duncan V Cammell Laird 1942

Question 3

Which case did Conway V Rimmer 1968 rule over?

Answer 3

Duncan V Cammell Laird 1942

Question 4

When/what was the second use of the practise statement? aka the first major use

Answer 4

Herrington V British Railways Board 1972

Question 5

Describe the second case of the practise statement, (the first major use), Herrington V BRB 1972?
(3)
-what happened
-what changes 
-why

Answer 5

• Child injured on a railway line as company didn’t maintain the fencing
• Lords felt that social and physical conditions had changed since 1929
• Railways Board owed a duty of care to child trespasser

Question 6

Which case did Herrington V BRB 1972 overrule? What did this case say?

Answer 6

Addie V Dumbreck (1929)

Said that the company only owed a duty of care when injury to a child was caused deliberately or recklessly

Question 7

What was the significance of the 3rd thought of using the Practise Statement , in which case?

Answer 7

• Refused to overrule earlier case

- Jones V Secretary of State for Social Services 1972

Question 8

Which case did Jones V secretary of State for Social Services 1972 consider when deciding whether to use the practise statement?

Answer 8

Re Dowling 1967

Question 9

Describe the case Jones V Secretary of State for Social Services 1972

• what act did it regard ?
• how many judges ?
• why did it not overrule?

Answer 9

• regarding National Insurance Act 1946
• 4 out of 7 judges regarded the decision in Re Dowling wrong
• Refused to overrule due to importance of certainty in law

Question 10

What/when was the 4th case involving the practise statement?

Answer 10

Knuller V DPP 1974

Question 11

Which case was considered in this decision of Knuller V DPP 1974?

Answer 11

Shaw V DPP 1962

Question 12

What did the court decide in Knuller V DPP 1974?

Answer 12

To follow the case of Shaw V DPP 1962

Question 13

Describe the case of Knuller V DPP 1974

• what was the defendant convicted of
• why did Judges follow Shaw V DPP 1962

Answer 13

• Convicted of ‘conspiracy to corrupt public morals’

- Judges believe the decision in Shaw V DPP was wrong but followed it anyway in the interest of certainty in law

Question 14

What did Lord Reid say regarding the case of Knuller V DPP 1974 and Shaw V DPP 1962?

Answer 14

Lord Reid
“Do not reverse where house believes decisions were wrong, but reverse only when there is a good reason for doing so in the interests in certainty”

Question 15

When/What was the 3rd use of the practise statement, also the 5th case in which it was considered?

Answer 15

Milliangoes V George Frank 1976

Question 16

What case did Milliangoes V George Frank 1976 overrule?

Answer 16

Havana Railways 1961

Question 17

How did the case of Millangoes V George Frank 1976 use the Practise Statement ?

Answer 17

HOL used PS to overrule previous judgement that damages could only be awarded in UK sterling rather than foreign currencies

Question 18

When/what was the first use of the practise statement in a criminal case? (the 6th use overall)

Answer 18

R V Shivpuri 1986

Question 19

What case did the first use of the PS in criminal law did R V Shivpuri 1886 overrule?

Answer 19

Anderson V Ryan 1985

Question 20

Why was it acceptable for the HOL to use the practise statement without critique for a criminal case in R V Shivpuri 1986?

Answer 20

The case of Anderson V Ryan 1985 was criticised by academic lawyers at the time

Question 21

What did the case of R V Shivpuri 1986 involve?

Answer 21

on attempts to do the impossible

Question 22

In when/what case was the 4th use of the practise statement (the 7th overall) ?

Answer 22

Pepper V Hart 1993

Question 23

What case did Pepper V Hart 1993 overrule?

Answer 23

Davis V Johnson 1978

Question 24

Describe the case of Pepper V Hart 1993

-what did it ban?(1)

Answer 24

Overruled previous ban on use of Hansard in statutory interpretation
(hansard=debate of an Act of Parliament)

Question 25

Which case was the 5th use of the PS (8th overall)?

Answer 25

R V R&G 2003

Question 26

Which case did the 5th use of the PS statement, RVG&R2003 , (8th overall) overrule?

Answer 26

-Caldwell 1982

Question 27

Describe the case of R V G &R 2003

-why did it overrule Caldwell 1982

Answer 27

-HOL overruled decision that Recklessness included a situation where D has not realised risk of own actions causing damage but where an ordinary person would have