Edited, memorised or added to reading list

on 05-Aug-2016 (Fri)

Do you want BuboFlash to help you learning these things? Click here to log in or create user.

Flashcard 1378728152332

Tags
#consideration #contract
Question
It is common textbook practice to contrast Stilk v Myrick with the not altogether dissimilar case of [ case ]. In the latter, it was not just two crew members who deserted; rather, there had been many desertions, leaving the ship's crew seriously depleted. The captain promised the remaining crew members £40 extra pay if they would complete the voyage. It was held that the promise was binding. It was dangerous to put to sea a ship so undermanned. The seamen were not obliged to do this under their contracts of service and were, therefore, free to enter into a fresh contract, which would include the extra remuneration, for the remaining part of the voyage.
Answer
Hartley v Ponsonby (1857) 7 E & B 872

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
It is common textbook practice to contrast Stilk v Myrick with the not altogether dissimilar case of Hartley v Ponsonby (1857) 7 E & B 872. In the latter, it was not just two crew members who deserted; rather, there had been many desertions, leaving the ship's crew seriously depleted. The captain promised the remaining c

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378729987340

Tags
#consideration #contract
Question
[ case ] FACTS: The captain of a ship promised his crew that, if they shared between them the work of two seamen who had deserted, the wages of the deserters would be shared out between them. HELD: The promise was not binding because the seamen gave no consideration: they were already contractually bound to do any extra work to complete the voyage.
Answer
Stilk v Myrick (1809) 2 Camp 317

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Stilk v Myrick (1809) 2 Camp 317 FACTS: The captain of a ship promised his crew that, if they shared between them the work of two seamen who had deserted, the wages of the deserters would be shared out between them. H

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378731822348

Tags
#consideration #contract
Question
Where an individual promises to resist a course of action which he never intended to pursue, no consideration will stem from the promise to forbear: [ case ].
Answer
Arrale v Costain Civil Engineering Ltd [1976] 1 Lloyd's Rep 98

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Where an individual promises to resist a course of action which he never intended to pursue, no consideration will stem from the promise to forbear: Arrale v Costain Civil Engineering Ltd [1976] 1 Lloyd's Rep 98.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378733657356

Tags
#consideration #contract
Question
In [ case ], an uncle promised his nephew $5,000 if the nephew would refrain from 'drinking liquor, using tobacco, swearing and playing cards or billiards for money until he should become 21 years of age'. The nephew complied but the defendant, the uncle's executor, refused to make the payment. It was held that the promise was enforceable because the nephew had provided consideration by restricting his lawful freedom of action and there was no information as to how arduous that would have been for him.
Answer
Hamer v Sidway

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Hamer v Sidway, an uncle promised his nephew $5,000 if the nephew would refrain from 'drinking liquor, using tobacco, swearing and playing cards or billiards for money until he should become 21 year

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378735492364

Tags
#consideration #contract
Question
In Hamer v Sidway, an uncle promised his nephew $5,000 if the nephew would refrain from 'drinking liquor, using tobacco, swearing and playing cards or billiards for money until he should become 21 years of age'. The nephew complied but the defendant, the uncle's executor, refused to make the payment. It was held that the promise was enforceable because the nephew had provided consideration by [...] and there was no information as to how arduous that would have been for him.
Answer
restricting his lawful freedom of action

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ards for money until he should become 21 years of age'. The nephew complied but the defendant, the uncle's executor, refused to make the payment. It was held that the promise was enforceable because the nephew had provided consideration by <span>restricting his lawful freedom of action and there was no information as to how arduous that would have been for him.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378736540940

Tags
#certainties #equity #law
Question
Technical words are not required; ‘equity looks to the [...]’. The word ‘trust’ need not necessarily be used for a trust to be created.

In Re Kayford [1975] 1 All ER 604, Megarry J said (at page 607 A):

. . . it is well settled that a trust can be created without using the words ‘trust’ or ‘confidence’ or the like: the question is whether in substance a sufficient intention to create a trust has been manifested.

Answer
intent rather than the form

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Technical words are not required; ‘equity looks to the intent rather than the form’. The word ‘trust’ need not necessarily be used for a trust to be created. In Re Kayford [1975] 1 All ER 604, Megarry J said (at page 607 A): . . . it is well se

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378737589516

Tags
#certainties #equity #law
Question
Technical words are not required; ‘equity looks to the intent rather than the form’. The word ‘trust’ need not necessarily be used for a trust to be created.

In [ case ], Megarry J said (at page 607 A):

. . . it is well settled that a trust can be created without using the words ‘trust’ or ‘confidence’ or the like: the question is whether in substance a sufficient intention to create a trust has been manifested.

Answer
Re Kayford [1975] 1 All ER 604

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Technical words are not required; ‘equity looks to the intent rather than the form’. The word ‘trust’ need not necessarily be used for a trust to be created. In Re Kayford [1975] 1 All ER 604, Megarry J said (at page 607 A): . . . it is well settled that a trust can be created without using the words ‘trust’ or ‘confidence’ or the like: the question is whether i

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378739424524

Tags
#certainties #equity #law
Question
Re Kayford [1975] 1 All ER 604 A mail-order company fearful that it might go into liquidation may pay customers’ moneys into a separate bank account opened for the purpose of protecting them from merely being debtors of the company if not receiving their ordered goods. This will amount to [...]. Of course, a customer on sending his cheque to such a company to buy goods could himself by covering letter require the company to hold the cheque money (as soon as cleared) on trust for himself.
Answer
a trust of the moneys for the customers

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
y fearful that it might go into liquidation may pay customers’ moneys into a separate bank account opened for the purpose of protecting them from merely being debtors of the company if not receiving their ordered goods. This will amount to <span>a trust of the moneys for the customers. Of course, a customer on sending his cheque to such a company to buy goods could himself by covering letter require the company to hold the cheque money (as soon as cleared) on trust

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378740473100

Tags
#certainties #equity #law
Question
In Paul v Constance [1977] 1 WLR 527 the county court judge found an intention to create a trust where a man had told his cohabitant that the money in his bank account was [...] and ordered half the money to be paid to her after his death, rather than pass to his wife. The Court of Appeal upheld this, Bridge LJ saying that the question was whether in the circumstances, Mr Constance had done something which was equivalent to declaring himself a trustee of the moneys in the account for himself and Mrs Paul in equal shares. Scarman LJ said that this was a borderline case because one could not pinpoint a specific moment of declaration but in all the circumstances the discussions on numerous occasions between Mr Constance and Mrs Paul constituted an express declaration of trust.
Answer
as much hers as his

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Paul v Constance [1977] 1 WLR 527 the county court judge found an intention to create a trust where a man had told his cohabitant that the money in his bank account was as much hers as his and ordered half the money to be paid to her after his death, rather than pass to his wife. The Court of Appeal upheld this, Bridge LJ saying that the question was whether in the circu

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378741521676

Tags
#certainties #equity #law
Question
In Paul v Constance [1977] 1 WLR 527 the county court judge found an intention to create a trust where a man had told his cohabitant that the money in his bank account was as much hers as his and ordered [...], rather than pass to his wife. The Court of Appeal upheld this, Bridge LJ saying that the question was whether in the circumstances, Mr Constance had done something which was equivalent to declaring himself a trustee of the moneys in the account for himself and Mrs Paul in equal shares. Scarman LJ said that this was a borderline case because one could not pinpoint a specific moment of declaration but in all the circumstances the discussions on numerous occasions between Mr Constance and Mrs Paul constituted an express declaration of trust.
Answer
half the money to be paid to her after his death

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
tml>In Paul v Constance [1977] 1 WLR 527 the county court judge found an intention to create a trust where a man had told his cohabitant that the money in his bank account was as much hers as his and ordered half the money to be paid to her after his death, rather than pass to his wife. The Court of Appeal upheld this, Bridge LJ saying that the question was whether in the circumstances, Mr Constance had done something which was equiva

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378742570252

Tags
#certainties #equity #law
Question
[ case ] The testatrix gave her residuary estate to Thomas Harrison ‘for his own use and benefit, as I have full confidence in him, that if I die without lawful issue he will . . . leave the bulk of my said residuary estate’ to specified persons. The use of the words ‘full confidence’ at that time would have been sufficient to create a trust. The court held the phrase ‘the bulk of my estate’ was not sufficiently certain for a trust, so Thomas Harrison took the property absolutely. A trust of an unidentified section of chattels (tangible property) will fail, whereas a trust of an unidentified section of intangible property, such as shares, is valid.
Answer
Palmer v Simmonds (1854) 2 Drew 221

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Palmer v Simmonds (1854) 2 Drew 221 The testatrix gave her residuary estate to Thomas Harrison ‘for his own use and benefit, as I have full confidence in him, that if I die without lawful issue he will . . . leave the b

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378744405260

Tags
#certainties #equity #law
Question
Palmer v Simmonds (1854) 2 Drew 221 The testatrix gave her residuary estate to Thomas Harrison ‘for his own use and benefit, as I have full confidence in him, that if I die without lawful issue he will . . . leave the bulk of my said residuary estate’ to specified persons. The use of the words ‘full confidence’ at that time would have been sufficient to create a trust. The court held the phrase ‘the bulk of my estate’ was [...] for a trust, so Thomas Harrison took the property absolutely. A trust of an unidentified section of chattels (tangible property) will fail, whereas a trust of an unidentified section of intangible property, such as shares, is valid.
Answer
not sufficiently certain

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
issue he will . . . leave the bulk of my said residuary estate’ to specified persons. The use of the words ‘full confidence’ at that time would have been sufficient to create a trust. The court held the phrase ‘the bulk of my estate’ was <span>not sufficiently certain for a trust, so Thomas Harrison took the property absolutely. A trust of an unidentified section of chattels (tangible property) will fail, whereas a trust of an unidentified secti

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378745453836

Tags
#certainties #equity #law
Question
Palmer v Simmonds (1854) 2 Drew 221 The testatrix gave her residuary estate to Thomas Harrison ‘for his own use and benefit, as I have full confidence in him, that if I die without lawful issue he will . . . leave the bulk of my said residuary estate’ to specified persons. The use of the words ‘full confidence’ at that time would have been sufficient to create a trust. The court held the phrase ‘the bulk of my estate’ was not sufficiently certain for a trust, so Thomas Harrison [...]. A trust of an unidentified section of chattels (tangible property) will fail, whereas a trust of an unidentified section of intangible property, such as shares, is valid.
Answer
took the property absolutely

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
estate’ to specified persons. The use of the words ‘full confidence’ at that time would have been sufficient to create a trust. The court held the phrase ‘the bulk of my estate’ was not sufficiently certain for a trust, so Thomas Harrison <span>took the property absolutely. A trust of an unidentified section of chattels (tangible property) will fail, whereas a trust of an unidentified section of intangible property, such as shares, is valid.</

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378746502412

Tags
#certainties #equity #law
Question
In contrast, a trust of an unidentified section of intangible property is valid: In [ case ], who owned 950 of the 1000 issued shares of a private company, orally declared himself a trustee of 5 per cent of the issued shares. This 5 per cent amounted to 50 shares. This was held to be sufficiently certain even though no particular 50 shares had been identified as subject to the trust, so it was unclear which 900 were retained by Moss. Colin Rimer QC, the judge at first instance, thought it significant that the subject-matter of the trust was intangible, since tangible assets, although apparently similar, may have distinguishing characteristics, for example some bottles of wine might have deteriorated. Intangible property, however, is all the same, provided the shares are of the same class, so there is no need to identify which 50 shares are being held on trust. Whilst Dillon LJ in the Court of Appeal stated that all the shares were identical, he held that the inter vivos trust was valid because there would have been a valid testamentary trust if Moss had died, by will leaving 50 shares for X and the remaining 900 for Y. This analogy is, however, erroneous because such a testator has clearly divested themself of all beneficial ownership in the 950 shares in favour of X and Y between them absolutely entitled to the 950 shares, but Moss was claiming he had not yet divested himself of any identifiable beneficial interest in the shares, To do this he would have had to send his certificate for 950 shares to the company secretary to issue two certificates to Moss, one for 900 and one for 50 so that the latter could then be held on trust for Hunter.
Answer
Hunter v Moss

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In contrast, a trust of an unidentified section of intangible property is valid: In Hunter v Moss, who owned 950 of the 1000 issued shares of a private company, orally declared himself a trustee of 5 per cent of the issued shares. This 5 per cent amounted to 50 shares. This was h

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378748337420

Tags
#certainties #equity #law
Question
Re Goldcorp Exchange Ltd [1995] AC 74 Purchasers of bullion, who had paid for it but had not taken delivery, claimed rights to it on the insolvency of the company. Their claims were rejected, apart from a group whose bullion had been segregated. There was no trust for the others as [...]. No particular bullion had been segregated for them.
Answer
there was no identifiable property on which any trust could attach

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
hasers of bullion, who had paid for it but had not taken delivery, claimed rights to it on the insolvency of the company. Their claims were rejected, apart from a group whose bullion had been segregated. There was no trust for the others as <span>there was no identifiable property on which any trust could attach. No particular bullion had been segregated for them. <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378749385996

Tags
#certainties #equity #law
Question
[ case ] In this case, a testator devised his houses in Southwold to trustees on trust for his widow for life and after her death in trust to convey to his daughter Maria one of the houses, whichever she [i.e. Maria] should choose, and to convey ‘all my other houses’ to his daughter Charlotte. Maria died in the testator’s lifetime and so could not choose any particular house. Consequently the trust in favour of Charlotte was void as it was uncertain what property the trust applied to.
Answer
Boyce v Boyce (1849) 16 Sim 476

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Boyce v Boyce (1849) 16 Sim 476 In this case, a testator devised his houses in Southwold to trustees on trust for his widow for life and after her death in trust to convey to his daughter Maria one of the houses, whi

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378751221004

Tags
#certainties #equity #law
Question
In [ case ], the House of Lords relaxed the test for discretionary trusts, adopting the less strict test which applies to mere powers of appointment. Lord Wilberforce deliberately characterised the powers of trustees of a discretionary trust as ‘trust powers’ because the trustees were under a duty to exercise those powers, while the trustees were under no such duty in respect of mere powers of appointment. Trust powers and powers of appointment were both powers and so should be subject to the same test for certainty. Note; that in a discretionary trust deed the trustees often have a discretionary mere power of appointment (e.g. in favour of charity or another branch of the settlor’s family) that they may or may not exercise as they see fit from time to time, as well as their basic discretionary trust power that they must exercise to distribute income or capital to such beneficiaries as they choose, if they do not choose to exercise their mere power of appointment
Answer
McPhail v Doulton [1971] AC 424

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In McPhail v Doulton [1971] AC 424, the House of Lords relaxed the test for discretionary trusts, adopting the less strict test which applies to mere powers of appointment. Lord Wilberforce deliberately characterised

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378753056012

Tags
#certainties #equity #law
Question
It is important to decide whether a particular gift is a discretionary trust or a gift subject to a condition precedent, as shown by Re Barlow’s WT [1979] 1 All ER 296 . Here the testatrix died owning a large collection of valuable pictures. Some of these were given to her executor to hold on trust for sale subject to a direction that ‘all or any member of my family and any friends of mine who wish to do so [may] purchase any of such pictures’ at the lower of probate value or 1970 catalogue price. This was held to be a [...], not a discretionary trust.
Answer
gift subject to a condition precedent

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
hold on trust for sale subject to a direction that ‘all or any member of my family and any friends of mine who wish to do so [may] purchase any of such pictures’ at the lower of probate value or 1970 catalogue price. This was held to be a <span>gift subject to a condition precedent, not a discretionary trust.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378754104588

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The Diceyan view of parliamentary sovereignty rests on the notion that [...], so neither the manner in which legislation is passed, nor the substance of the law, should be reviewable by the courts.
Answer
Acts of Parliament are the highest form of law

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The Diceyan view of parliamentary sovereignty rests on the notion that Acts of Parliament are the highest form of law, so neither the manner in which legislation is passed, nor the substance of the law, should be reviewable by the courts.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378755153164

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
[ case ] The Acts of Union between England and Scotland contained some fundamental provisions relating to the preservation of certain aspects of Scottish law and institutions, for example that alterations in private law must be 'for the evident utility of the subjects in Scotland' (article XVIII). This case involved a challenge to a European Community common fisheries policy measure because it gave access to Scottish waters. The complainant argued that this was a change in private law which was not for the 'evident utility' of Scots, as required by the Acts of Union. The court held that access to fisheries was not 'private law' and therefore the measure could not be challenged. However, Lord Keith did not rule out an argument of the kind put forward in situation where it might be more relevant on the facts. The arguments in both the above cases were quite inconclusive. Dicey certainly viewed the Acts of Union as having no higher legal status than any other Act and it is true to say that the UK Parliament has altered many of the principles contained in both the Scottish and Irish Acts of Union. Furthermore, the judicial remarks in McCormick and Gibson were obiter. No Scottish court has actually declared an Act of Parliament to be invalid on the basis that it is inconsistent with the Act of Union.
Answer
Gibson v Lord Advocate [1975] SLT 134

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Gibson v Lord Advocate [1975] SLT 134 The Acts of Union between England and Scotland contained some fundamental provisions relating to the preservation of certain aspects of Scottish law and institutions, for example that al

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378756988172

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
One of the most heated debates in recent years occurred during the passing of the Hunting Act 2004. This Act made the hunting of wild animals, and especially foxes, by dogs unlawful. At issue in [ case ] was the validity of the Hunting Act itself. The Act was passed without the consent of the House of Lords, using the accelerated procedure created by the Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949.
Answer
R (on application of Jackson) v Attorney General [2005] UKHL 56

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
One of the most heated debates in recent years occurred during the passing of the Hunting Act 2004. This Act made the hunting of wild animals, and especially foxes, by dogs unlawful. At issue in R (on application of Jackson) v Attorney General [2005] UKHL 56 was the validity of the Hunting Act itself. The Act was passed without the consent of the House of Lords, using the accelerated procedure created by the Parliament Acts of 1911 and 194

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378758823180

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
Equality before the Law This idea can be split into two aspects: that [...], and that everyone is subject to the ordinary courts of the land.
Answer
everyone is subject to the same law

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Equality before the Law This idea can be split into two aspects: that everyone is subject to the same law, and that everyone is subject to the ordinary courts of the land.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378759871756

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
Equality before the Law This idea can be split into two aspects: that everyone is subject to the same law, and that [...].
Answer
everyone is subject to the ordinary courts of the land

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Equality before the Law This idea can be split into two aspects: that everyone is subject to the same law, and that everyone is subject to the ordinary courts of the land.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378760920332

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
More recently, the Jobseekers (Back to Work Schemes) Act 2013 has also overridden the effect of the Court of Appeal's decision in [ case ]. This had required the Department of Work and Pensions to pay a rebate to claimants whose Jobseekers' Allowance had been withdrawn when they refused to take part in an unpaid back-to-work 'training scheme'
Answer
R (Reilly) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2013] EWCA Civ 66

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
More recently, the Jobseekers (Back to Work Schemes) Act 2013 has also overridden the effect of the Court of Appeal's decision in R (Reilly) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2013] EWCA Civ 66. This had required the Department of Work and Pensions to pay a rebate to claimants whose Jobseekers' Allowance had been withdrawn when they refused to take part in an unpaid back-to-

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378762755340

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
More recently, the [ statute ] has also overridden the effect of the Court of Appeal's decision in R (Reilly) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2013] EWCA Civ 66. This had required the Department of Work and Pensions to pay a rebate to claimants whose Jobseekers' Allowance had been withdrawn when they refused to take part in an unpaid back-to-work 'training scheme'
Answer
Jobseekers (Back to Work Schemes) Act 2013

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
More recently, the Jobseekers (Back to Work Schemes) Act 2013 has also overridden the effect of the Court of Appeal's decision in R (Reilly) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2013] EWCA Civ 66. This had required the Department of Work a

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378764590348

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The Freedom of Information Act 2000 created new rights of access to information and was intended to generate greater openness in government. It superseded the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information, which came into effect in 1994 (with a revised edition in 1997). It commits departments and public and governmental bodies to publish information, but does not confer an entitlement. The Freedom of Information Act covers a range of public authorities, including government departments, the National Assembly for Wales, the Northern Ireland Assembly, local government and National Health Service. An Information Commissioner, to whom the public has direct access, regulates the provisions in the Act. The Act permits people to apply for access to documents, or copies of documents, as well as the information itself. A very valuable insight into the role of the Information Commissioner and the statutory framework regulating the application of the Act can be gained from reading the leading case of R [ case ] relating to the request for disclosure of Prince Charles’s letters to ministers.
Answer
(Evans) v Attorney General [2015] UKSC 21

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ies of documents, as well as the information itself. A very valuable insight into the role of the Information Commissioner and the statutory framework regulating the application of the Act can be gained from reading the leading case of R <span>(Evans) v Attorney General [2015] UKSC 21 relating to the request for disclosure of Prince Charles’s letters to ministers. <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378766425356

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The classic doctrine of individual ministerial responsibility required ministers to [...].
Answer
accept responsibility and, if necessary, resign for any errors and failures of their departments

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The classic doctrine of individual ministerial responsibility required ministers to accept responsibility and, if necessary, resign for any errors and failures of their departments.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378767473932

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
Standing committees in the House of Commons are not to be confused with select committees. They are of a temporary nature, being established to [...].
Answer
examine in detail a bill at the committee stage of its formal passage through Parliament

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Standing committees in the House of Commons are not to be confused with select committees. They are of a temporary nature, being established to examine in detail a bill at the committee stage of its formal passage through Parliament.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378768522508

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
There is now a very strong constitutional convention that the executive exercises the monarch's powers. This is sometimes phrased as [...].
Answer
the Queen acting on the advice of the Prime Minister

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
There is now a very strong constitutional convention that the executive exercises the monarch's powers. This is sometimes phrased as the Queen acting on the advice of the Prime Minister.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378769571084

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
There is now a very strong constitutional convention that [...]. This is sometimes phrased as the Queen acting on the advice of the Prime Minister.
Answer
the executive exercises the monarch's powers

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
There is now a very strong constitutional convention that the executive exercises the monarch's powers. This is sometimes phrased as the Queen acting on the advice of the Prime Minister.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378770619660

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The term 'royal prerogative' refers to the [...], as distinct from those conferred and exercised under statute. In this context, the term 'the Crown' refers to the executive, not simply the monarch. This is because it is now highly unlikely that the royal prerogative will be exercised in any way other than by the Executive on behalf of the monarch.
Answer
common law powers of the ‘Crown’

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The term 'royal prerogative' refers to the common law powers of the ‘Crown’, as distinct from those conferred and exercised under statute. In this context, the term 'the Crown' refers to the executive, not simply the monarch. This is because it is now highly

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378771668236

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The term 'royal prerogative' refers to the common law powers of the ‘Crown’, as distinct from those conferred and exercised under statute. In this context, the term 'the Crown' refers to [...]. This is because it is now highly unlikely that the royal prerogative will be exercised in any way other than by the Executive on behalf of the monarch.
Answer
the executive, not simply the monarch

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The term 'royal prerogative' refers to the common law powers of the ‘Crown’, as distinct from those conferred and exercised under statute. In this context, the term 'the Crown' refers to the executive, not simply the monarch. This is because it is now highly unlikely that the royal prerogative will be exercised in any way other than by the Executive on behalf of the monarch.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378772716812

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
With regard to absolute powers, the courts established that:
(a) They were inseparable from the Crown: [ case ].
(b) Even though absolute in one sense, they were still limited by law in that 'the King hath no prerogative but that which the law of the land allows him': Case of Proclamations (1611) 12 Co Rep 74.
Answer
Case of King's Prerogative in Saltpetre (1607)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
With regard to absolute powers, the courts established that: (a) They were inseparable from the Crown: Case of King's Prerogative in Saltpetre (1607). (b) Even though absolute in one sense, they were still limited by law in that 'the King hath no prerogative but that which the law of the land allows him': Case of Proclamations (

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378774551820

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
With regard to absolute powers, the courts established that:
(a) They were inseparable from the Crown: Case of King's Prerogative in Saltpetre (1607).
(b) Even though absolute in one sense, they were still limited by law in that 'the King hath no prerogative but that which the law of the land allows him': [ case ].
Answer
Case of Proclamations (1611) 12 Co Rep 74

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
were inseparable from the Crown: Case of King's Prerogative in Saltpetre (1607). (b) Even though absolute in one sense, they were still limited by law in that 'the King hath no prerogative but that which the law of the land allows him': <span>Case of Proclamations (1611) 12 Co Rep 74.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378776386828

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
With regard to absolute powers, the courts established that:
(a) They were inseparable from the Crown: Case of King's Prerogative in Saltpetre (1607).
(b) Even though absolute in one sense, they were still limited by law in that 'the King hath no prerogative but [...]': Case of Proclamations (1611) 12 Co Rep 74.
Answer
that which the law of the land allows him

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
, the courts established that: (a) They were inseparable from the Crown: Case of King's Prerogative in Saltpetre (1607). (b) Even though absolute in one sense, they were still limited by law in that 'the King hath no prerogative but <span>that which the law of the land allows him': Case of Proclamations (1611) 12 Co Rep 74.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378777435404

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
the constitutional arrangements following the [ case ] clearly indicate that the Crown has no powers that cannot be taken away by Parliament and a number of cases (see below) have confirmed the superiority of statute over the prerogative.
Answer
Bill of Rights 1689

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
the constitutional arrangements following the Bill of Rights 1689 clearly indicate that the Crown has no powers that cannot be taken away by Parliament and a number of cases (see below) have confirmed the superiority of statute over the prerogative.<

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378779270412

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
the constitutional arrangements following the Bill of Rights 1689 clearly indicate that the Crown has no powers that [...] and a number of cases (see below) have confirmed the superiority of statute over the prerogative.
Answer
cannot be taken away by Parliament

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
the constitutional arrangements following the Bill of Rights 1689 clearly indicate that the Crown has no powers that cannot be taken away by Parliament and a number of cases (see below) have confirmed the superiority of statute over the prerogative.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378780318988

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
the constitutional arrangements following the Bill of Rights 1689 clearly indicate that the Crown has no powers that cannot be taken away by Parliament and a number of cases (see below) have confirmed the [...].
Answer
superiority of statute over the prerogative

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
html>the constitutional arrangements following the Bill of Rights 1689 clearly indicate that the Crown has no powers that cannot be taken away by Parliament and a number of cases (see below) have confirmed the superiority of statute over the prerogative.<html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378781367564

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In the 17th century, the courts drew a distinction between 'absolute' and 'ordinary' powers of the monarch ([ case ]). The absolute powers were those that were almost entirely discretionary and largely unregulated by binding principle, such as the conduct of foreign policy or the pardoning of convicted criminals. The ordinary powers were exercised in accordance with established principle, practice and procedure, e.g. powers concerning the administration of justice.
Answer
Bate's Case (1606) 2 St Tr 371

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In the 17th century, the courts drew a distinction between 'absolute' and 'ordinary' powers of the monarch (Bate's Case (1606) 2 St Tr 371). The absolute powers were those that were almost entirely discretionary and largely unregulated by binding principle, such as the conduct of foreign policy or the pardoning of convic

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378783202572

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In the 17th century, the courts drew a distinction between 'absolute' and 'ordinary' powers of the monarch (Bate's Case (1606) 2 St Tr 371). The absolute powers were those that [...], such as the conduct of foreign policy or the pardoning of convicted criminals. The ordinary powers were exercised in accordance with established principle, practice and procedure, e.g. powers concerning the administration of justice.
Answer
were almost entirely discretionary and largely unregulated by binding principle

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In the 17th century, the courts drew a distinction between 'absolute' and 'ordinary' powers of the monarch (Bate's Case (1606) 2 St Tr 371). The absolute powers were those that were almost entirely discretionary and largely unregulated by binding principle, such as the conduct of foreign policy or the pardoning of convicted criminals. The ordinary powers were exercised in accordance with established principle, practice and procedure, e.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378784251148

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In the 17th century, the courts drew a distinction between 'absolute' and 'ordinary' powers of the monarch (Bate's Case (1606) 2 St Tr 371). The absolute powers were those that were almost entirely discretionary and largely unregulated by binding principle, such as the conduct of foreign policy or the pardoning of convicted criminals. The ordinary powers were [...], e.g. powers concerning the administration of justice.
Answer
exercised in accordance with established principle, practice and procedure

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
1606) 2 St Tr 371). The absolute powers were those that were almost entirely discretionary and largely unregulated by binding principle, such as the conduct of foreign policy or the pardoning of convicted criminals. The ordinary powers were <span>exercised in accordance with established principle, practice and procedure, e.g. powers concerning the administration of justice.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378786348300

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The control of the armed forces has traditionally been seen as a matter that cannot be challenged in court: see [ case ].
Answer
Chandler v DPP [1964] AC 763

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The control of the armed forces has traditionally been seen as a matter that cannot be challenged in court: see Chandler v DPP [1964] AC 763.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378789231884

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In [ case ], CND sought a declaration that U.N. Resolution 1441 did not authorise military action against Iraq. Simon Brown LJ gave the leading judgment and stated that it was: 'accept(ed) that the decision to take military action is beyond the court's purview'. Decisions that involve the 'defence of the realm' in the sense of declaring war or deploying armed forces are matters exclusively for the executive. In such situations, the consequences of executive action can only be judged politically and not legally through the courts.
Answer
R (on the application of Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament) v Prime Minister of the UK (2002) EWHC 2759 QB

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In R (on the application of Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament) v Prime Minister of the UK (2002) EWHC 2759 QB, CND sought a declaration that U.N. Resolution 1441 did not authorise military action against Iraq. Simon Brown LJ gave the leading judgment and stated that it was: 'accept(ed) that the

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378791066892

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In R (on the application of Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament) v Prime Minister of the UK (2002) EWHC 2759 QB, CND sought a declaration that U.N. Resolution 1441 did not authorise military action against Iraq. Simon Brown LJ gave the leading judgment and stated that it was: '[...]'. Decisions that involve the 'defence of the realm' in the sense of declaring war or deploying armed forces are matters exclusively for the executive. In such situations, the consequences of executive action can only be judged politically and not legally through the courts.
Answer
accept(ed) that the decision to take military action is beyond the court's purview

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
aign for Nuclear Disarmament) v Prime Minister of the UK (2002) EWHC 2759 QB, CND sought a declaration that U.N. Resolution 1441 did not authorise military action against Iraq. Simon Brown LJ gave the leading judgment and stated that it was: '<span>accept(ed) that the decision to take military action is beyond the court's purview'. Decisions that involve the 'defence of the realm' in the sense of declaring war or deploying armed forces are matters exclusively for the executive. In such situations, the consequenc

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378792115468

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In R (on the application of Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament) v Prime Minister of the UK (2002) EWHC 2759 QB, CND sought a declaration that U.N. Resolution 1441 did not authorise military action against Iraq. Simon Brown LJ gave the leading judgment and stated that it was: 'accept(ed) that the decision to take military action is beyond the court's purview'. Decisions that involve the 'defence of the realm' in the sense of declaring war or deploying armed forces are matters exclusively for the executive. In such situations, the consequences of executive action can only be judged [...].
Answer
politically and not legally through the courts

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
court's purview'. Decisions that involve the 'defence of the realm' in the sense of declaring war or deploying armed forces are matters exclusively for the executive. In such situations, the consequences of executive action can only be judged <span>politically and not legally through the courts.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378794212620

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In [ case ], Lord Reid stated: 'the disposition and armament of the armed forces are and for centuries have been within the exclusive discretion of the Crown …' (at 791).
Answer
Chandler v Director of Public Prosecutions [1964] AC 777

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Chandler v Director of Public Prosecutions [1964] AC 777, Lord Reid stated: 'the disposition and armament of the armed forces are and for centuries have been within the exclusive discretion of the Crown …' (at 791).

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378796047628

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In Chandler v Director of Public Prosecutions [1964] AC 777, [...] stated: 'the disposition and armament of the armed forces are and for centuries have been within the exclusive discretion of the Crown …' (at 791).
Answer
Lord Reid

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Chandler v Director of Public Prosecutions [1964] AC 777, Lord Reid stated: 'the disposition and armament of the armed forces are and for centuries have been within the exclusive discretion of the Crown …' (at 791).

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378798669068

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In [ case ], installations owned by the oil company in Burma (then a British colony) had been destroyed during World War Two on the orders of the commander of the British forces, to prevent them falling into the hands of the Japanese. By a 3-2 majority the House of Lords held that compensation was payable to the company, there being no general rule that the prerogative could be exercised without compensation. Lord Reid stated: '[T]he prerogative certainly covers doing all those things in an emergency which are necessary for the conduct of war.'
Answer
Burmah Oil Company Ltd v Lord Advocate [1965] AC 75

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Burmah Oil Company Ltd v Lord Advocate [1965] AC 75, installations owned by the oil company in Burma (then a British colony) had been destroyed during World War Two on the orders of the commander of the British forces, to prevent them fa

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378800504076

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In Burmah Oil Company Ltd v Lord Advocate [1965] AC 75, installations owned by the oil company in Burma (then a British colony) had been destroyed during World War Two on the orders of the commander of the British forces, to prevent them falling into the hands of the Japanese. By a 3-2 majority the House of Lords held that compensation was payable to the company, there being no general rule that the prerogative could be exercised without compensation. Lord Reid stated: '[T]he prerogative certainly covers doing all those things in an emergency which are [...].'
Answer
necessary for the conduct of war

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
eld that compensation was payable to the company, there being no general rule that the prerogative could be exercised without compensation. Lord Reid stated: '[T]he prerogative certainly covers doing all those things in an emergency which are <span>necessary for the conduct of war.'<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378801552652

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The prerogative of mercy. The Home Secretary (on behalf of the Crown) may pardon offences of a public nature prosecuted by the Crown. This particular prerogative has been held by the courts to be non-justiciable in the past. However, new cases cast doubt on this view. In [ case ], the Court of Appeal held that the courts had no jurisdiction to inquire whether or not the Home Secretary had been negligent in the exercise of this prerogative. In De Freitas v Benny [1976] AC 239, Lord Diplock stated in the Privy Council (at 247): 'Mercy is not the subject of legal rights. It begins where legal rights end'. The decision in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Bentley [1994] QB 349 has modified the position, however.
Answer
Hanratty v Lord Butler of Saffron Walden (1971) 115 SJ 386

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Secretary (on behalf of the Crown) may pardon offences of a public nature prosecuted by the Crown. This particular prerogative has been held by the courts to be non-justiciable in the past. However, new cases cast doubt on this view. In <span>Hanratty v Lord Butler of Saffron Walden (1971) 115 SJ 386, the Court of Appeal held that the courts had no jurisdiction to inquire whether or not the Home Secretary had been negligent in the exercise of this prerogative. In De Freitas v Benn

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378803387660

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The prerogative of mercy. The Home Secretary (on behalf of the Crown) may pardon offences of a public nature prosecuted by the Crown. This particular prerogative has been held by the courts to be non-justiciable in the past. However, new cases cast doubt on this view. In Hanratty v Lord Butler of Saffron Walden (1971) 115 SJ 386, the Court of Appeal held that the courts had no jurisdiction to inquire whether or not [...]. In De Freitas v Benny [1976] AC 239, Lord Diplock stated in the Privy Council (at 247): 'Mercy is not the subject of legal rights. It begins where legal rights end'. The decision in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Bentley [1994] QB 349 has modified the position, however.
Answer
the Home Secretary had been negligent in the exercise of this prerogative

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
he courts to be non-justiciable in the past. However, new cases cast doubt on this view. In Hanratty v Lord Butler of Saffron Walden (1971) 115 SJ 386, the Court of Appeal held that the courts had no jurisdiction to inquire whether or not <span>the Home Secretary had been negligent in the exercise of this prerogative. In De Freitas v Benny [1976] AC 239, Lord Diplock stated in the Privy Council (at 247): 'Mercy is not the subject of legal rights. It begins where legal rights end'. The decision in

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378804436236

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The prerogative of mercy. The Home Secretary (on behalf of the Crown) may pardon offences of a public nature prosecuted by the Crown. This particular prerogative has been held by the courts to be non-justiciable in the past. However, new cases cast doubt on this view. In Hanratty v Lord Butler of Saffron Walden (1971) 115 SJ 386, the Court of Appeal held that the courts had no jurisdiction to inquire whether or not the Home Secretary had been negligent in the exercise of this prerogative. In [ case ], Lord Diplock stated in the Privy Council (at 247): 'Mercy is not the subject of legal rights. It begins where legal rights end'. The decision in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Bentley [1994] QB 349 has modified the position, however.
Answer
De Freitas v Benny [1976] AC 239

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
this view. In Hanratty v Lord Butler of Saffron Walden (1971) 115 SJ 386, the Court of Appeal held that the courts had no jurisdiction to inquire whether or not the Home Secretary had been negligent in the exercise of this prerogative. In <span>De Freitas v Benny [1976] AC 239, Lord Diplock stated in the Privy Council (at 247): 'Mercy is not the subject of legal rights. It begins where legal rights end'. The decision in R v Secretary of State for the Home D

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378806271244

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The grant and revocation of passports is an exercise of prerogative power. A passport was defined in [ case ] by Lord Alvestone CJ as:

'[A] document issued in the name of the Sovereign on the responsibility of a Minister of the Crown to a named individual, intended to be presented to the Governments of foreign nations and to be used for that individual's protection as a British subject in foreign countries.'

As regards judicial review of a decision to refuse to issue a passport, see R v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, ex parte Everett [1989] 1 All ER 655.
Answer
R v Brailsford [1905] 2 KB 730

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The grant and revocation of passports is an exercise of prerogative power. A passport was defined in R v Brailsford [1905] 2 KB 730 by Lord Alvestone CJ as: '[A] document issued in the name of the Sovereign on the responsibility of a Minister of the Crown to a named individual, intended to be presented t

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378808106252

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The making and ratification of treaties. In effect this has been seen as a contract between states, which does not generally require the approval of Parliament: see [ case ].
Answer
Attorney General for Canada v Attorney General for Ontario [1937] AC 326

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The making and ratification of treaties. In effect this has been seen as a contract between states, which does not generally require the approval of Parliament: see Attorney General for Canada v Attorney General for Ontario [1937] AC 326.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378809941260

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
However, certain actions claimed to be carried out under the prerogative of 'defence of the realm' may be reviewable. The Supreme Court, in the conjoined appeals of [ case ], held by a majority that the doctrine of combat immunity should be construed narrowly. The claimants in this case, representing UK soldiers killed on active service in Iraq, were claiming, inter alia, that the Ministry of Defence had been negligent in the provision of equipment and training. The court recognised that actions and decisions taken by military commanders in relation to military engagements should not be subject to judicial challenge, because of the danger of 'judicialising warfare'. It did not accept, however, the Ministry's arguments that immunity should apply in relation to failings that were remote from the pressures and uncertainties of the battlefield.
Answer
Smith, Ellis and Allbutt v Ministry of Defence [2013] UKSC 41

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
However, certain actions claimed to be carried out under the prerogative of 'defence of the realm' may be reviewable. The Supreme Court, in the conjoined appeals of Smith, Ellis and Allbutt v Ministry of Defence [2013] UKSC 41, held by a majority that the doctrine of combat immunity should be construed narrowly. The claimants in this case, representing UK soldiers killed on active service in Iraq, were clai

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378811776268

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
However, certain actions claimed to be carried out under the prerogative of 'defence of the realm' may be reviewable. The Supreme Court, in the conjoined appeals of Smith, Ellis and Allbutt v Ministry of Defence [2013] UKSC 41, held by a majority that the doctrine of combat immunity should be construed narrowly. The claimants in this case, representing UK soldiers killed on active service in Iraq, were claiming, inter alia, that the Ministry of Defence had been negligent in the provision of equipment and training. The court recognised that actions and decisions taken by military commanders in relation to military engagements should not be subject to judicial challenge, because of the danger of 'judicialising warfare'. It did not accept, however, the Ministry's arguments that immunity should apply in relation to [...].
Answer
failings that were remote from the pressures and uncertainties of the battlefield

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ry commanders in relation to military engagements should not be subject to judicial challenge, because of the danger of 'judicialising warfare'. It did not accept, however, the Ministry's arguments that immunity should apply in relation to <span>failings that were remote from the pressures and uncertainties of the battlefield.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378812824844

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
in the case of [ case ] the Court of Appeal confirmed that the UK's military intervention in Iraq had been a lawful exercise of the prerogative power held by the executive. The wider issue relating to the legality of the war in Iraq was therefore not relevant to the appellants' defence. (They had been prosecuted for conspiracy to cause criminal damage at a military air base).
Answer
R v Jones (Margaret) & Others, [2004] EWCA Crim 1981

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
in the case of R v Jones (Margaret) & Others, [2004] EWCA Crim 1981 the Court of Appeal confirmed that the UK's military intervention in Iraq had been a lawful exercise of the prerogative power held by the executive. The wider issue relating to the le

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378814659852

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
Parliament can legislate to modify, abolish, or simply put on a statutory footing any particular prerogative power. For example, the historical prerogative power to take and destroy private property in times of emergency has been modified by the [ statute ].
Answer
Civil Contingencies Act 2004

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ament can legislate to modify, abolish, or simply put on a statutory footing any particular prerogative power. For example, the historical prerogative power to take and destroy private property in times of emergency has been modified by the <span>Civil Contingencies Act 2004.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378816494860

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
Parliament can legislate to modify, abolish, or simply put on a statutory footing any particular prerogative power. For example, the historical prerogative power to [...] has been modified by the Civil Contingencies Act 2004.
Answer
take and destroy private property in times of emergency

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Parliament can legislate to modify, abolish, or simply put on a statutory footing any particular prerogative power. For example, the historical prerogative power to take and destroy private property in times of emergency has been modified by the Civil Contingencies Act 2004.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378817543436

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The previous position in English law, as apparently confirmed by the House of Lords in Factortame Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport [1989] 2 All ER 692, was that [...]. The European Court of Justice in Factortame [1990] ECR I-2433, however, took a different view based on European Community law, and the House of Lords in M v Home Office seem to have approved of this approach.
Answer
injunctions were not available against the Crown

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The previous position in English law, as apparently confirmed by the House of Lords in Factortame Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport [1989] 2 All ER 692, was that injunctions were not available against the Crown. The European Court of Justice in Factortame [1990] ECR I-2433, however, took a different view based on European Community law, and the House of Lords in M v Home Office seem to have

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378818592012

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The previous position in English law, as apparently confirmed by the House of Lords in [ case ], was that injunctions were not available against the Crown. The European Court of Justice in Factortame [1990] ECR I-2433, however, took a different view based on European Community law, and the House of Lords in M v Home Office seem to have approved of this approach.
Answer
Factortame Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport [1989] 2 All ER 692

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The previous position in English law, as apparently confirmed by the House of Lords in Factortame Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport [1989] 2 All ER 692, was that injunctions were not available against the Crown. The European Court of Justice in Factortame [1990] ECR I-2433, however, took a different view based on European Community

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378820427020

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
This area of immunity was an important consideration in the decision of the House of Lords in [ case ], where the Home Office had given an undertaking to the court that an asylum seeker would not be deported before his case had been fully heard, but failed to honour its assurance. The House of Lords held that, in judicial review proceedings against ministers of the Crown acting in their official capacity, the court could grant interim injunctions against ministers. Furthermore, the court had jurisdiction to make a finding of contempt against them or their departments.
Answer
M v Home Office [1993] 3 All ER 537

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
This area of immunity was an important consideration in the decision of the House of Lords in M v Home Office [1993] 3 All ER 537, where the Home Office had given an undertaking to the court that an asylum seeker would not be deported before his case had been fully heard, but failed to honour its assurance. The

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378822262028

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
There are certain crown immunities from litigation. These include the fact that the Crown is not directly subject to the contempt jurisdiction and that the sovereign has personal immunity from [...].
Answer
prosecution or being sued for a wrongful act

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
There are certain crown immunities from litigation. These include the fact that the Crown is not directly subject to the contempt jurisdiction and that the sovereign has personal immunity from prosecution or being sued for a wrongful act.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378823310604

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In [ case ] it was held that Parliament may abolish or modify the prerogative by express words or by 'necessary inducement'.
Answer
De Morgan v Director of Social Welfare, [1982] 2 WLR 407

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In De Morgan v Director of Social Welfare, [1982] 2 WLR 407 it was held that Parliament may abolish or modify the prerogative by express words or by 'necessary inducement'.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378825145612

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In De Morgan v Director of Social Welfare, [1982] 2 WLR 407 it was held that Parliament may [...] by express words or by 'necessary inducement'.
Answer
abolish or modify the prerogative

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In De Morgan v Director of Social Welfare, [1982] 2 WLR 407 it was held that Parliament may abolish or modify the prerogative by express words or by 'necessary inducement'.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378826194188

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In De Morgan v Director of Social Welfare, [1982] 2 WLR 407 it was held that Parliament may abolish or modify the prerogative by [...].
Answer
express words or by 'necessary inducement'

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In De Morgan v Director of Social Welfare, [1982] 2 WLR 407 it was held that Parliament may abolish or modify the prerogative by express words or by 'necessary inducement'.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378827242764

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In [ case ], De Keyser's Hotel was required for use by the War Office during the First World War. When negotiations over the amount of rent to be paid broke down, the Army Council took possession compulsorily, under the Defence of the Realm Regulations, which gave the right to full compensation. However, it was later argued by the Army Council that the seizure of property was alternatively authorised by the prerogative, under which there was no right to full compensation. The House of Lords held that the Defence of the Realm Regulations governing the assessment of compensation must be observed. It reasoned that, assuming the prerogative power in question did in fact exist, the Crown could not simply choose whether to act under that power or under statutory authority. Lord Atkinson summed up the position as follows:

'[W]hen a statute, expressing the will and intention of the King and of the three estates of the realm, is passed, it abridges the Royal Prerogative while it is in force to this extent: that the Crown can only do the particular thing under and in accordance with the statutory provisions, and that its prerogative power to do that thing is in abeyance.'

Answer
Attorney-General v De Keyser's Hotel Ltd [1920] AC 508

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Attorney-General v De Keyser's Hotel Ltd [1920] AC 508, De Keyser's Hotel was required for use by the War Office during the First World War. When negotiations over the amount of rent to be paid broke down, the Army Council took possession c

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378829077772

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
There may be situations where statutory powers, while dealing with the same general area as the prerogative, do not expressly override it. In such instances, the controversial case of [ case ] suggests that the prerogative power may still apply, if exercised for the public good (and not to deprive individuals of protection conferred by statute).
Answer
R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Northumbria Police Authority [1988] 1 All ER 556

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
There may be situations where statutory powers, while dealing with the same general area as the prerogative, do not expressly override it. In such instances, the controversial case of R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Northumbria Police Authority [1988] 1 All ER 556 suggests that the prerogative power may still apply, if exercised for the public good (and not to deprive individuals of protection conferred by statute).

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378830912780

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
No new prerogatives can come into existence. In [ case ], the BBC claimed that the Crown had a monopoly of broadcasting, exercised through the BBC, which was therefore entitled to Crown exemption from income tax. This contention was unsuccessful in the Court of Appeal. Lord Diplock stated: 'It is 350 years and a civil war too late for the Queen's courts to broaden the prerogative.' Thus, any prerogative power must originate from the powers possessed by the monarch before the advent of the modern parliamentary system, effectively 1688. But one should be aware of the way in which the courts can interpret the precise scope or reach of prerogative powers. See, for example, R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Northumbria Police Authority [1988] 1 All ER 556.
Answer
BBC v Johns [1965] Ch 32

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
No new prerogatives can come into existence. In BBC v Johns [1965] Ch 32, the BBC claimed that the Crown had a monopoly of broadcasting, exercised through the BBC, which was therefore entitled to Crown exemption from income tax. This contention was unsucce

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378832747788

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
No new prerogatives can come into existence. In BBC v Johns [1965] Ch 32, the BBC claimed that the Crown had a monopoly of broadcasting, exercised through the BBC, which was therefore entitled to Crown exemption from income tax. This contention was unsuccessful in the Court of Appeal. Lord Diplock stated: 'It is 350 years and a civil war too late for the Queen's courts to broaden the prerogative.' Thus, any prerogative power must originate from [...], effectively 1688. But one should be aware of the way in which the courts can interpret the precise scope or reach of prerogative powers. See, for example, R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Northumbria Police Authority [1988] 1 All ER 556.
Answer
the powers possessed by the monarch before the advent of the modern parliamentary system

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
on from income tax. This contention was unsuccessful in the Court of Appeal. Lord Diplock stated: 'It is 350 years and a civil war too late for the Queen's courts to broaden the prerogative.' Thus, any prerogative power must originate from <span>the powers possessed by the monarch before the advent of the modern parliamentary system, effectively 1688. But one should be aware of the way in which the courts can interpret the precise scope or reach of prerogative powers. See, for example, R v Secretary of State for

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378833796364

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
No new prerogatives can come into existence. In BBC v Johns [1965] Ch 32, the BBC claimed that the Crown had a monopoly of broadcasting, exercised through the BBC, which was therefore entitled to Crown exemption from income tax. This contention was unsuccessful in the Court of Appeal. Lord Diplock stated: 'It is 350 years and a civil war too late for the Queen's courts to broaden the prerogative.' Thus, any prerogative power must originate from the powers possessed by the monarch before the advent of the modern parliamentary system, effectively 1688. But one should be aware of the way in which the courts can interpret the precise scope or reach of prerogative powers. See, for example, [ case ].
Answer
R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Northumbria Police Authority [1988] 1 All ER 556

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
owers possessed by the monarch before the advent of the modern parliamentary system, effectively 1688. But one should be aware of the way in which the courts can interpret the precise scope or reach of prerogative powers. See, for example, <span>R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Northumbria Police Authority [1988] 1 All ER 556.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378835631372

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
[ case ], can be seen as an extension of the De Keyser principle. Here, the relationship between statutory and prerogative powers was again considered when a number of trade unions challenged a decision taken by the Home Secretary using prerogative power.
Answer
R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Fire Brigades Union [1995] 2 All ER 244

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Fire Brigades Union [1995] 2 All ER 244, can be seen as an extension of the De Keyser principle. Here, the relationship between statutory and prerogative powers was again considered when a number of trade unions challenged

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378837466380

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In [ case ], a British citizen residing in Spain, whose passport was about to expire, applied to the British Embassy in Madrid for a new one. The applicant was informed that a passport would not be issued, because a warrant for his arrest had been issued in the UK; it was the policy of the Secretary of State not to issue passports in such circumstances. The Court of Appeal accepted that the issuing of a passport is carried out under a prerogative power. However, following GCHQ, the court maintained that the reviewability in practice of the exercise of a prerogative power depended upon the subject matter of the prerogative in question. The Court of Appeal was not prepared to accept that the issuing of passports came under that form of prerogative power, involving foreign affairs, which was inherently non- justiciable. The Crown and the Royal Prerogative

Taylor LJ stated:

'The majority of their Lordships [in GCHQ] indicated that whether judicial review of the exercise of prerogative power is open depends upon the subject matter and in particular whether it is justiciable. At the top of the scale of executive functions under the prerogative are matters of high policy, of which examples were given by their Lordships; making treaties, making war, dissolving Parliament … Clearly those matters … are not justiciable. But the grant or refusal of a passport is in a quite different category. It is a matter of administrative decision, affecting the rights of individuals and their freedom to travel.'

Although the court found that the decision whether or not to issue the applicant with a passport was one that was susceptible in principle to judicial review, they ultimately held that the Secretary of State's policy was not unlawful because, having properly followed the policy and taken all relevant matters into consideration, he was entitled to come to the decision that he had.
Answer
R v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, ex parte Everett, [1989] QB 811

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In R v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, ex parte Everett, [1989] QB 811, a British citizen residing in Spain, whose passport was about to expire, applied to the British Embassy in Madrid for a new one. The applicant was informed that a passport would not be

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378839563532

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In [ case ], the Court of Appeal reviewed the legality of the rule prohibiting homosexuals from serving in the armed forces. (Notethat the ban is no longer applied since the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in Smith and Grady v UK (2000) 29 EHRR 493, where the court held that the ban violated the European Convention on Human Rights, art 8.)
Answer
R v Ministry of Defence, ex parte Smith [1996] QB 517

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In R v Ministry of Defence, ex parte Smith [1996] QB 517, the Court of Appeal reviewed the legality of the rule prohibiting homosexuals from serving in the armed forces. (Notethat the ban is no longer applied since the decision of the Europ

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378841398540

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In R v Ministry of Defence, ex parte Smith [1996] QB 517, the Court of Appeal reviewed the legality of the rule prohibiting homosexuals from serving in the armed forces. (Notethat the ban is no longer applied since the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in [ case ], where the court held that the ban violated the European Convention on Human Rights, art 8.)
Answer
Smith and Grady v UK (2000) 29 EHRR 493

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ex parte Smith [1996] QB 517, the Court of Appeal reviewed the legality of the rule prohibiting homosexuals from serving in the armed forces. (Notethat the ban is no longer applied since the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in <span>Smith and Grady v UK (2000) 29 EHRR 493, where the court held that the ban violated the European Convention on Human Rights, art 8.)<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378843233548

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In [ case ], the ratification of the Maastricht treaty by the UK government, an exercise of the treaty-making prerogative power, was challenged by a leading newspaper columnist. He argued, inter alia, that joining a common European Union security system was an unlawful surrender of the Crown's duty to protect the realm. It was further argued that under English common law, the Crown is incapable of abandoning or transferring any of its ancient prerogative powers without statutory enactment. The government argued that the matters raised by the applicant were not justiciable, as treaty-making powers rest with the Crown and their exercise cannot be challenged or questioned in the courts. The court was prepared to assume that, in respect of the government's exercise of prerogative powers in relation to the making of treaties, the courts could consider such matters. Unfortunately for the applicant, however, the court held that the Maastricht treaty did not involve a surrender or transfer of prerogative powers.
Answer
R v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, ex parte Rees-Mogg, [1994] QB 552

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In R v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, ex parte Rees-Mogg, [1994] QB 552, the ratification of the Maastricht treaty by the UK government, an exercise of the treaty-making prerogative power, was challenged by a leading newspaper columnist. He argued, inter

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378845330700

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The Court of Appeal appeared particularly bold in this formerly ‘forbidden’ area in the more recent case of [ case ]. The court issued a writ of habeas corpus requiring the government to seek the return of a Pakistani national detained without trial in Afghanistan by the United States following his capture by UK forces in Iraq. The decision did not amount to an instruction to the government to demand the detainee's return but reflected the court's conclusion that there were sufficient grounds for believing that the UK had the means of obtaining control over the detainee's custody.
Answer
Rahmatullah v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2012] UKSC 48

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The Court of Appeal appeared particularly bold in this formerly ‘forbidden’ area in the more recent case of Rahmatullah v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2012] UKSC 48. The court issued a writ of habeas corpus requiring the government to seek the return of a Pakistani national detained without trial in Afghanistan by the United States following his

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378847165708

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In [ case ] a similar question arose. This case concerned three detainees at Guantanamo Bay, who were British residents but, unlike Abbasi, were not British nationals. They also sought an order to compel the Foreign Office to make a formal request for their release. The Court of Appeal considered the appellants' rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (and those of their families), concluding that they had no arguable case, primarily as they were not entitled to diplomatic protection in the same way as nationals were. This confirmed the general approach taken in Abbasi, therefore.
Answer
R (on the application of Al Rawi) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, [2006] EWCA Civ 1279

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In R (on the application of Al Rawi) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, [2006] EWCA Civ 1279 a similar question arose. This case concerned three detainees at Guantanamo Bay, who were British residents but, unlike Abbasi, were not British nationals. They also sought an order to

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378849000716

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
As an example, the courts have considered whether there is scope for judicial review of a refusal to render diplomatic assistance to a British subject suffering violation of a fundamental right as the result of the conduct of authorities of a foreign state. In [ case ] the mother of a British citizen detained in Guantanamo Bay brought proceedings to compel the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) to make representations on her son's behalf to the United States government. The Court of Appeal recognised that Abbasi had a legitimate expectation of diplomatic assistance, but that the expectation was very limited and the discretion of the FCO very wide. On the facts, the FCO was seen to have done all that was required of it. However, the court stated that there was no reason in principle why an FCO decision (or inaction by the FCO) could not be reviewable in the future, if it could be shown that a decision or inaction was irrational or contrary to a legitimate expectation. However, the court was quite clear that they could not enter into the 'forbidden areas', which included decisions affecting higher foreign policy itself.
Answer
R (on the application of Abbasi) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, [2002] EWCA Civ 1598

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
courts have considered whether there is scope for judicial review of a refusal to render diplomatic assistance to a British subject suffering violation of a fundamental right as the result of the conduct of authorities of a foreign state. In <span>R (on the application of Abbasi) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, [2002] EWCA Civ 1598 the mother of a British citizen detained in Guantanamo Bay brought proceedings to compel the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) to make representations on her son's behalf to the Unit

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378850835724

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The prerogative of mercy was also addressed in [ case ] which related to the transfer to a British prison of Michael Shields, a football fan who was imprisoned in Bulgaria following an accusation of murder, and his request for a free pardon following the confession of another man.
Answer
R (Shields) v Secretary of State for Justice, [2008] EWHC 3102 (Admin)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The prerogative of mercy was also addressed in R (Shields) v Secretary of State for Justice, [2008] EWHC 3102 (Admin) which related to the transfer to a British prison of Michael Shields, a football fan who was imprisoned in Bulgaria following an accusation of murder, and his request for a free pardon

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378852670732

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The court's approach in Bentley, in respect of the reviewability of the prerogative of mercy, was adopted in [ case ]. The claimant was a serving prisoner who had provided the police and prison authorities with valuable assistance. As a result, the Home Secretary awarded the claimant three years' remission from his sentence. The claimant's solicitors sought judicial review of this decision, arguing that in pre-sentence cases the length of remission was far greater than that granted to the claimant, who was a serving prisoner. The court agreed that the decision by the Secretary of State to recommend remission in the instant case was a matter amenable to judicial review. The courts regularly had to make decisions about reduction in sentence lengths. On the facts, however, the court held that the exercise of the Home Secretary's prerogative of mercy in this case was different from decisions taken by judges in pre-sentence cases and so the Home Secretary had not acted unlawfully.
Answer
R (on the application of B) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2002] EWHC 587 (Admin)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The court's approach in Bentley, in respect of the reviewability of the prerogative of mercy, was adopted in R (on the application of B) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2002] EWHC 587 (Admin). The claimant was a serving prisoner who had provided the police and prison authorities with valuable assistance. As a result, the Home Secretary awarded the claimant three years' rem

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378854505740

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The idea was given more modern expression by Montesquieu during the 18th century. He believed that liberty would be best protected if there was a separation of powers into judicial, executive and legislative branches:

'When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty ... again, there is no liberty if the power of judging is not separated from the legislative and the executive. If it were joined with the legislative, the life and liberty of the subject would be exposed to arbitrary control; for the judge would then be the legislator. If it were joined to the executive power, the judge might behave with violence and oppression. There would be an end to everything, if the same man, or the same body, whether of the nobles, or of the people, were to exercise those three powers, that of enacting laws, that of executing public affairs and that of trying crimes or individual causes. Any society in which the safeguarding of rights is not assured, and the separation of powers is not observed, has no constitution.' Montesquieu, [...],(1689-1755)

Answer
De L’Esprit des Lois

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
f enacting laws, that of executing public affairs and that of trying crimes or individual causes. Any society in which the safeguarding of rights is not assured, and the separation of powers is not observed, has no constitution.' Montesquieu, <span>De L’Esprit des Lois,(1689-1755) <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378855554316

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
[ who ] stated:

‘It is a feature of the peculiarly British conception of the separation of powers that Parliament, the executive and the courts have each their distinct and largely exclusive domain. Parliament has a legally unchallengeable right to make whatever laws it thinks right. The executive carries on the administration of the country in accordance with the powers conferred on it by law. The courts interpret the laws, and see that they are obeyed.'

Answer
Lord Mustill

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Lord Mustill stated: ‘It is a feature of the peculiarly British conception of the separation of powers that Parliament, the executive and the courts have each their distinct and largely

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378857389324

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
Lord Mustill stated:

‘It is a feature of the peculiarly British conception of the separation of powers that Parliament, the executive and the courts have each their distinct and largely exclusive domain. Parliament has a [...]. The executive carries on the administration of the country in accordance with the powers conferred on it by law. The courts interpret the laws, and see that they are obeyed.'

Answer
legally unchallengeable right to make whatever laws it thinks right

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
an>Lord Mustill stated: ‘It is a feature of the peculiarly British conception of the separation of powers that Parliament, the executive and the courts have each their distinct and largely exclusive domain. Parliament has a legally unchallengeable right to make whatever laws it thinks right. The executive carries on the administration of the country in accordance with the powers conferred on it by law. The courts interpret the laws, and see that they are obeyed.' &#

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378858437900

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
'It is essential, if a man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last result, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law. ' [...]
Answer
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
'It is essential, if a man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last result, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law. ' The Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378859486476

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
Leon Fuller's analysis differs from that of Raz. Fuller argues that law can and must possess [...] or it is not worthy of the title 'legal system'. Thus he is prepared to concede that a regime which merely commanded authority could be described as a governmental system, but would not qualify as a 'legal' system. A legal system must in his view serve the interests of the population and not simply those of the regime itself.
Answer
some form of 'internal morality'

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Leon Fuller's analysis differs from that of Raz. Fuller argues that law can and must possess some form of 'internal morality' or it is not worthy of the title 'legal system'. Thus he is prepared to concede that a regime which merely commanded authority could be described as a governmental system, but would not

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378860535052

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
Leon Fuller's analysis differs from that of Raz. [ who ] argues that law can and must possess some form of 'internal morality' or it is not worthy of the title 'legal system'. Thus he is prepared to concede that a regime which merely commanded authority could be described as a governmental system, but would not qualify as a 'legal' system. A legal system must in his view serve the interests of the population and not simply those of the regime itself.
Answer
Fuller

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Leon Fuller's analysis differs from that of Raz. Fuller argues that law can and must possess some form of 'internal morality' or it is not worthy of the title 'legal system'. Thus he is prepared to concede that a regime which merely commanded

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378862370060

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The formal view of the rule of law is that, for there to be government under the law, laws must adhere to certain procedural requirements. This view says nothing about the morality of the law, merely that it must be capable of guiding the behaviour of its subjects so that an individual can be certain of their actions and position within society in any given circumstances. This extends to an expectation of how the citizen will be treated by the state and other private citizens. In order to achieve this quality of certainty, law must be prospective and clear, and it should be adjudicated upon y an independent judiciary with access to the courts available to all citizens. [ who ] is a key advocate of the formalist conception of the rule of law.
Answer
Joseph Raz

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ed by the state and other private citizens. In order to achieve this quality of certainty, law must be prospective and clear, and it should be adjudicated upon y an independent judiciary with access to the courts available to all citizens. <span>Joseph Raz is a key advocate of the formalist conception of the rule of law.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378864205068

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The formal view of the rule of law is that, for there to be government under the law, laws must adhere to certain [...]. This view says nothing about the morality of the law, merely that it must be capable of guiding the behaviour of its subjects so that an individual can be certain of their actions and position within society in any given circumstances. This extends to an expectation of how the citizen will be treated by the state and other private citizens. In order to achieve this quality of certainty, law must be prospective and clear, and it should be adjudicated upon y an independent judiciary with access to the courts available to all citizens. Joseph Raz is a key advocate of the formalist conception of the rule of law.
Answer
procedural requirements

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The formal view of the rule of law is that, for there to be government under the law, laws must adhere to certain procedural requirements. This view says nothing about the morality of the law, merely that it must be capable of guiding the behaviour of its subjects so that an individual can be certain of their actions an

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378865253644

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
According to Dicey, sovereignty means that there are [...]. However, it is important to note that Dicey's theory is concerned purely with the absence of any legal limitations on Parliament. He acknowledged that there were clearly political limits on what Parliament could do.
Answer
no substantive limitations on the legislation that Parliament may enact

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
According to Dicey, sovereignty means that there are no substantive limitations on the legislation that Parliament may enact. However, it is important to note that Dicey's theory is concerned purely with the absence of any legal limitations on Parliament. He acknowledged that there were clearly political li

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378866302220

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
According to Dicey, sovereignty means that there are no substantive limitations on the legislation that Parliament may enact. However, it is important to note that Dicey's theory is concerned purely with the absence of any legal limitations on Parliament. He acknowledged that there were clearly [...].
Answer
political limits on what Parliament could do

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
substantive limitations on the legislation that Parliament may enact. However, it is important to note that Dicey's theory is concerned purely with the absence of any legal limitations on Parliament. He acknowledged that there were clearly <span>political limits on what Parliament could do.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378867350796

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
According to Dicey, sovereignty means that there are no substantive limitations on the legislation that Parliament may enact. However, it is important to note that Dicey's theory is concerned purely with [...]. He acknowledged that there were clearly political limits on what Parliament could do.
Answer
the absence of any legal limitations on Parliament

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
According to Dicey, sovereignty means that there are no substantive limitations on the legislation that Parliament may enact. However, it is important to note that Dicey's theory is concerned purely with the absence of any legal limitations on Parliament. He acknowledged that there were clearly political limits on what Parliament could do.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378868399372

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
The orthodox theory also states that Parliament can legislate for territory beyond the jurisdiction of the UK, even if this produces a conflict with international law.

[ case ] : The captain of a Norwegian trawler was convicted of fishing in the Moray Firth contrary to the Herring Fisheries (Scotland) Act 1889. The court held that it was bound to apply the Act, even though it restricted fishing beyond the three-mile territorial limit recognised by international law.
Answer
Mortensen v Peters (1906) 14 SLT 227

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The orthodox theory also states that Parliament can legislate for territory beyond the jurisdiction of the UK, even if this produces a conflict with international law. Mortensen v Peters (1906) 14 SLT 227 : The captain of a Norwegian trawler was convicted of fishing in the Moray Firth contrary to the Herring Fisheries (Scotland) Act 1889. The court held that it was bound to apply the Act,

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378870234380

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
It is also possible for Parliament to create statutes that conflict with public international law. In [ case ], a taxpayer challenged the validity of the Finance Act 1964. He argued that it conflicted with the Geneva Convention, a treaty to which the UK was a party, because part of the tax collected would go to the manufacture of nuclear weapons.

Ungoed-Thomas J said: 'What the statute itself enacts cannot be unlawful, because … it is the highest form of law known to this country. It is the law which prevails over every other form of law, and it is not for the court to say that a Parliamentary enactment… is illegal.'
Answer
Cheney v Conn [1968] 1 All ER 779

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
It is also possible for Parliament to create statutes that conflict with public international law. In Cheney v Conn [1968] 1 All ER 779, a taxpayer challenged the validity of the Finance Act 1964. He argued that it conflicted with the Geneva Convention, a treaty to which the UK was a party, because part of the tax colle

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378872593676

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
Parliament can also create legislation that changes aspects of the constitution. In [ case ], the validity of the Irish Church Act 1869 was challenged by a priest on the grounds that it disestablished his church in Ireland contrary to the Act of Union with Ireland (1800). This argument was rejected by the court, Cockburn CJ stating that:

'There is no judicial body in this country by which the validity of an Act of Parliament could be questioned. An Act of Legislature is superior in authority to any court of law. We have only to administer the law as we find it, and no court could pronounce judgment as to the validity of an Act of Parliament.'

Answer
Ex parte Canon Selwyn (1872) 36 JP 54

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Parliament can also create legislation that changes aspects of the constitution. In Ex parte Canon Selwyn (1872) 36 JP 54, the validity of the Irish Church Act 1869 was challenged by a priest on the grounds that it disestablished his church in Ireland contrary to the Act of Union with Ireland (1800). This

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378874428684

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In [ case ], Maugham LJ stated:

'The legislature cannot, according to our constitution, bind itself as to the force of subsequent legislation, and it is impossible for Parliament to enact that in a subsequent statute dealing with the same subject matter there can be no implied repeal. If in a subsequent Act Parliament chooses to make it plain that the earlier statute is being to some extent repealed, effect must be given to that intention just because it is the will of the Legislature.'

Answer
Ellen St Estates v Minister of Health [1934] 1 KB 590

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Ellen St Estates v Minister of Health [1934] 1 KB 590, Maugham LJ stated: 'The legislature cannot, according to our constitution, bind itself as to the force of subsequent legislation, and it is impossible for Parliament to en

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378876263692

Tags
#constitution #law #public
Question
In [ case ], a Scottish Nationalist raised an objection to the designation of the new monarch as Queen Elizabeth the Second. He argued that, as a matter of fact, the first Queen Elizabeth had been Queen of England but not of Scotland. The application was dismissed on other grounds but Lord Cooper stated, obiter:

'The principle of the unlimited sovereignty of parliament is a distinctively English principle which has no counterpart in Scottish Constitutional law ... Considering that the Union legislation extinguished the parliaments of Scotland and England and replaced them by a new parliament, I have difficulty in seeing why it should have been supposed that the new parliament of Great Britain must inherit all the peculiar characteristics of the English parliament, as if all that happened in 1707 was that Scottish representatives were admitted to the Parliament of England. That is not what was done.'

Answer
McCormick v Lord Advocate [1953] SC 396

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In McCormick v Lord Advocate [1953] SC 396, a Scottish Nationalist raised an objection to the designation of the new monarch as Queen Elizabeth the Second. He argued that, as a matter of fact, the first Queen Elizabeth had been

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378878098700

Tags
#equity #law #strangers
Question
The subjective element was discussed by the House of Lords in [ case ]. Here Twinsectra had loaned Yardley £1 million, paying it to his solicitor, Sims, who gave a written undertaking to Twinsectra’s solicitors that the money was to be used solely for acquiring property (immovables) for Yardley and for no other purpose. Sims transferred the money to Yardley’s other solicitor, Leach, who knew of Sims’ undertaking but yet used the money on Yardley’s instructions for other purposes. Leach knew that he was using the money for an unauthorised purpose, but thought that Sims was merely under a contractual obligation to Twinsectra not a Quistclose purpose trust obligation. The House of Lords held that the money was held on trust only to be used for acquiring property but (Lord Millett dissenting) appeared to hold that since Leach was not himself subjectively aware that what he was doing was something that the ordinary reasonable person would think was dishonest, he had rightfully had the case against him dismissed by the trial judge, whom the Court of Appeal had reversed, Lord Millett applied an objective test. Leach, a solicitor, had knowingly participated in arrangements which he knew to be an unauthorised use of the money in breach of Sims’ undertaking as a solicitor to Twinsectra’s solicitors. Leach was liable, regardless of whether or not he appreciated that the ordinary reasonable person would consider his knowing mishandling of the money (at the very least in breach of Sims’ contractual undertaking) as dishonest. The majority, whilst expressing approval for the Privy Council’s advice in Tan, appeared to have changed the test for dishonesty to the more subjective criminal test, so that not only must the defendant have done something that right- thinking people would consider dishonest, he must have been aware that they would so view his conduct. Lord Millett strongly dissented.
Answer
Twinsectra Ltd v Yardley & Others [2002] 2 AC 164

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The subjective element was discussed by the House of Lords in Twinsectra Ltd v Yardley & Others [2002] 2 AC 164. Here Twinsectra had loaned Yardley £1 million, paying it to his solicitor, Sims, who gave a written undertaking to Twinsectra’s solicitors that the money was to be used solely for ac

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378879933708

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
There is a different rule for payments out of active running accounts – most typically current accounts. Here the rule in [ case ] applies. This rule states that the first payment in to the account will be the first payment out. The rule has been applied as between two trusts and between a trust and an innocent contributor, e.g. in Re Diplock.
Answer
Re Clayton’s Case (1816) 1 Mer 572

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
There is a different rule for payments out of active running accounts – most typically current accounts. Here the rule in Re Clayton’s Case (1816) 1 Mer 572 applies. This rule states that the first payment in to the account will be the first payment out. The rule has been applied as between two trusts and between a trust and an innocent

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378881768716

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
There is a different rule for payments out of active running accounts – most typically current accounts. Here the rule in Re Clayton’s Case (1816) 1 Mer 572 applies. This rule states that the first payment in to the account will be the first payment out. The rule has been applied as between two trusts and between a trust and an innocent contributor, e.g. in [ case ].
Answer
Re Diplock

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Re Clayton’s Case (1816) 1 Mer 572 applies. This rule states that the first payment in to the account will be the first payment out. The rule has been applied as between two trusts and between a trust and an innocent contributor, e.g. in <span>Re Diplock. <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378883603724

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Court of Appeal in [ case ] has reluctantly confirmed that the rule is still good law, although subject to any contrary intention which the courts are ready to find. The rationale for this, as explained by Dillon LJ, is that the rule has been enshrined in English law for so long that it can only be replaced by a House of Lords (presumably now a Supreme Court) judgment. The case concerned the collapse of the Barlow Clowes investment company in Gibraltar. Investors had paid into investment plans, but the money had been stolen and the company was left owing £115m with assets of far less than that. Some investors argued that the rules in Re Clayton’s Case should be applied. This would mean that the later investors would recover nearly all their money, and the earlier investors, nothing. Woolf LJ held: ‘The rule need only be applied when it is convenient to do so and when its application can be said to do broad justice having regard to the nature of the competing claims. It is not applied if this is the intention or presumed intention of the beneficiaries. The rule is sensibly not applied when the costs of applying it is likely to exhaust the fund available for the beneficiaries.’ On the facts of the case it was decided that the investment fund was regarded by the investors as a common pool, and that they should share rateably in what remained because they had experienced a common misfortune. Accordingly, the court ordered a rateable distribution among the claimants who were investors.
Answer
Barlow Clowes International Ltd v Vaughan [1992] 4 All ER 22

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Court of Appeal in Barlow Clowes International Ltd v Vaughan [1992] 4 All ER 22 has reluctantly confirmed that the rule is still good law, although subject to any contrary intention which the courts are ready to find. The rationale for this, as explained by Dillon

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378885438732

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The most usual remedy at common law is a [...] against the recipient for the value of the property they have received.
Answer
personal claim

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The most usual remedy at common law is a personal claim against the recipient for the value of the property they have received.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378888060172

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Historically, common law only provided an action for specific recovery of land not chattels, so only rarely has tracing at common law led to a proprietary claim. One example is the case of [ case ] (above), where the owner was himself able to recover his property by seizing it.
Answer
Taylor v Plumer

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Historically, common law only provided an action for specific recovery of land not chattels, so only rarely has tracing at common law led to a proprietary claim. One example is the case of Taylor v Plumer (above), where the owner was himself able to recover his property by seizing it.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378889895180

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Only a person with [...] can use the common law rules, so a beneficiary under a trust cannot trace property and then claim it at law. However, they or their trustee can do this in equity.
Answer
legal title

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Only a person with legal title can use the common law rules, so a beneficiary under a trust cannot trace property and then claim it at law. However, they or their trustee can do this in equity.<

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378890943756

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Because these actions are personal and not proprietary, the defendant is still liable to repay the value of the property they received even if they no longer have it (or has mixed it with their own): [ cases (2) ].
Answer
Agip (Africa) Ltd v Jackson and Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale Ltd [1991] 2 AC 548

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Because these actions are personal and not proprietary, the defendant is still liable to repay the value of the property they received even if they no longer have it (or has mixed it with their own): Agip (Africa) Ltd v Jackson and Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale Ltd [1991] 2 AC 548.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378892778764

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Extraordinary Expenditure
Lord Goff in [ case ] held

…the mere fact that the defendant has spent the money, in whole or in part, does not of itself render it inequitable that he should be called upon to repay, because the expenditure might in any event have been incurred by him in the ordinary course of things.

Answer
Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Extraordinary Expenditure Lord Goff in Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale held …the mere fact that the defendant has spent the money, in whole or in part, does not of itself render it inequitable that he should be called upon to repay, because the

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378894613772

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
In [ case ], the Court of Appeal held that the payment of debts cannot normally be relied on as a change of position, as the defendant had to pay them anyway.
Answer
Scottish Equitable plc v Derby [2001] 3 All ER 818

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Scottish Equitable plc v Derby [2001] 3 All ER 818, the Court of Appeal held that the payment of debts cannot normally be relied on as a change of position, as the defendant had to pay them anyway.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378896448780

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
the availability of the defence does not depend upon the assets bought and subsequently consumed having any extraordinary characteristics in themselves. In [ case ], two backing musicians to Phil Collins were overpaid royalties from the sale of records. They used this money to supplement their everyday standard of living. Jonathan Parker J held the change of position defence could apply as although the assets acquired were of an everyday nature to the defendants, the amount they had acquired and the expense they had consequently incurred was extraordinary.
Answer
Philip Collins Ltd v Davis [2000] 3 All ER 808

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
the availability of the defence does not depend upon the assets bought and subsequently consumed having any extraordinary characteristics in themselves. In Philip Collins Ltd v Davis [2000] 3 All ER 808, two backing musicians to Phil Collins were overpaid royalties from the sale of records. They used this money to supplement their everyday standard of living. Jonathan Parker J held t

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378898283788

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
In [ case ] it was held that a defendant who changed their position in reliance on an anticipated receipt that is subsequently received can rely on the defence
Answer
Dextra Bank & Trust Co Ltd v Bank of Jamaica [2001] UKPC 50

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Dextra Bank & Trust Co Ltd v Bank of Jamaica [2001] UKPC 50 it was held that a defendant who changed their position in reliance on an anticipated receipt that is subsequently received can rely on the defence

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378900118796

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The Court of Appeal [ case ] held there to be two pre-requisites to tracing in equity:
1. A fiduciary relationship;
2. An equitable proprietary interest in the property being traced.
Answer
Re Diplock [1948] Ch 465

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The Court of Appeal Re Diplock [1948] Ch 465 held there to be two pre-requisites to tracing in equity: 1. A fiduciary relationship; 2. An equitable proprietary interest in the property being traced.</

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378901953804

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
While stating that nothing should be said to inhibit the development of the defence, Lord Goff in [ case ] made it clear at 580 that:

the defence is not open to one who has changed his position in bad faith … the defence should not be open to a wrongdoer.

He gave as an example of bad faith a defendant who had paid away the money, with knowledge of the facts entitling the claimant to restitution.
Answer
Lipkin Gorman Karpnale

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
While stating that nothing should be said to inhibit the development of the defence, Lord Goff in Lipkin Gorman Karpnale made it clear at 580 that: the defence is not open to one who has changed his position in bad faith … the defence should not be open to a wrongdoer. He gave as

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378903788812

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The remedy is not confined to claims between trustee and beneficiary, but to other fiduciaries, e.g. that of solicitor and client [ case ] and accountant and employer in Agip v Jackson (above).
Answer
Re Hallett’s Estate (1880) 13 ChD 696

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The remedy is not confined to claims between trustee and beneficiary, but to other fiduciaries, e.g. that of solicitor and client Re Hallett’s Estate (1880) 13 ChD 696 and accountant and employer in Agip v Jackson (above).

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378905623820

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The remedy is not confined to claims between trustee and beneficiary, but to other fiduciaries, e.g. that of solicitor and client Re Hallett’s Estate (1880) 13 ChD 696 and accountant and employer in [ case ] (above).
Answer
Agip v Jackson

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The remedy is not confined to claims between trustee and beneficiary, but to other fiduciaries, e.g. that of solicitor and client Re Hallett’s Estate (1880) 13 ChD 696 and accountant and employer in Agip v Jackson (above).

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378907458828

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Similarly, in [ case ], Goulding J held that a person who paid money to another under a mistake of fact retained an equitable interest and the conscience of the payee was subjected to a fiduciary duty to respect that interest. The decision in Chase Manhattan was discussed in the House of Lords in Westdeutsche, where the judge’s reasoning was doubted in holding that the Israel-British Bank held the additional $2,000,000 on constructive trust when it knew of the mistake made by Chase Manhattan. Lord Browne-Wilkinson at p 715 said that mere receipt gave rise to no trust but the retention of the moneys after the receiving bank learned of the mistake ‘may well have given rise to a constructive trust’ which allowed a claim in equity, being, it seems, a personally liability to account as a constructive trustee under the knowing receipt head
Answer
Chase Manhattan Bank v Israel-British Bank (London) Ltd [1981] Ch 105

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Similarly, in Chase Manhattan Bank v Israel-British Bank (London) Ltd [1981] Ch 105, Goulding J held that a person who paid money to another under a mistake of fact retained an equitable interest and the conscience of the payee was subjected to a fiduciary duty to re

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378909293836

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Fiduciary relationships have been found very easily in circumstances where tracing is sought: Lord Templeman in [ case ] approved the Australian case of Black v Freedman (1910) 12 CLR 105, where it was said that a thief holds stolen money on trust for the true owner and that the true owner may therefore trace in equity into a mixed fund. Lord Browne-Wilkinson was of the same view in Westdeutsche [1996] AC 669 at 716.
Answer
Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale Ltd

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Fiduciary relationships have been found very easily in circumstances where tracing is sought: Lord Templeman in Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale Ltd approved the Australian case of Black v Freedman (1910) 12 CLR 105, where it was said that a thief holds stolen money on trust for the true owner and that the true owner may therefore

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378911128844

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Fiduciary relationships have been found very easily in circumstances where tracing is sought: Lord Templeman in Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale Ltd approved the Australian case of Black v Freedman (1910) 12 CLR 105, where it was said that a thief holds stolen money on trust for the true owner and that the true owner may therefore trace in equity into a mixed fund. Lord Browne-Wilkinson was of the same view in [ case ] at 716.
Answer
Westdeutsche [1996] AC 669

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ase of Black v Freedman (1910) 12 CLR 105, where it was said that a thief holds stolen money on trust for the true owner and that the true owner may therefore trace in equity into a mixed fund. Lord Browne-Wilkinson was of the same view in <span>Westdeutsche [1996] AC 669 at 716.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378912963852

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
In [ case ], the next of kin sued the executors and also the charities themselves for the return of the money. The action against the executors was compromised with the court’s approval, the executors agreeing to repay £15,000 of the £203,000 out of their own pockets. The next of kin sought to recover the balance from the charities concerned. The right to trace and make a proprietary claim in equity was considered at length by the Court of Appeal in Re Diplock, in case their decision on the availability of a personal claim (see later) was reversed by the House of Lords. However, the House of Lords affirmed their decision on the personal claim and did not consider it necessary to discuss the proprietary claim.
Answer
Re Diplock [1948] Ch 465

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Re Diplock [1948] Ch 465, the next of kin sued the executors and also the charities themselves for the return of the money. The action against the executors was compromised with the court’s approval, the exec

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378914798860

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Similarly where trust money or property has been mixed with other funds, the beneficiaries have the right to a proportionate share of the property acquired with the mixed fund or an equitable charge (or lien) over the property mixture, to secure their claim. This was made clear by the House of Lords in [ case ] which rejected Re Hallett’s Estate (1880) 13 Ch D 696 as apparent authority for a claimant only having a charge over property of the defendant fiduciary that had been purchased with mixed money.
Answer
Foskett v McKeown [2001] 1 AC 102

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
funds, the beneficiaries have the right to a proportionate share of the property acquired with the mixed fund or an equitable charge (or lien) over the property mixture, to secure their claim. This was made clear by the House of Lords in <span>Foskett v McKeown [2001] 1 AC 102 which rejected Re Hallett’s Estate (1880) 13 Ch D 696 as apparent authority for a claimant only having a charge over property of the defendant fiduciary that had been purchased with mi

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378916633868

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
In [ case ], Lord Millett said:

‘Where a trustee wrongfully uses trust money to provide part of the cost of acquiring an asset, the beneficiary is entitled at his option either to claim a proportionate share of the asset or to enforce a lien upon it to secure his personal claim against the trustee for the amount of the misapplied money.’

Answer
Foskett v McKeown

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Foskett v McKeown, Lord Millett said: ‘Where a trustee wrongfully uses trust money to provide part of the cost of acquiring an asset, the beneficiary is entitled at his option either to clai

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378918468876

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The situation is different where an innocent volunteer spends the claimant’s money on an asset which he already owns.
In cases where no value is added to the asset, the claimant’s money is treated as dissipated and cannot be traced. In [ case ] the court gave the example of an innocent volunteer who spent trust money in altering his house to his personal needs without adding one penny to its value.
In cases where value is added to the asset, Lord Browne-Wilkinson said obiter in Foskett v McKeown that the trust would not be entitled to a proportion of the value of the asset but ‘at most a proprietary lien’ over the asset. Furthermore the innocent volunteer may have a defence to the claim if it would be inequitable to enforce it
Answer
Re Diplock

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
n>The situation is different where an innocent volunteer spends the claimant’s money on an asset which he already owns. In cases where no value is added to the asset, the claimant’s money is treated as dissipated and cannot be traced. In <span>Re Diplock the court gave the example of an innocent volunteer who spent trust money in altering his house to his personal needs without adding one penny to its value. In cases where value is

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378920303884

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The situation is different where an innocent volunteer spends the claimant’s money on an asset which he already owns.
In cases where no value is added to the asset, the claimant’s money is treated as dissipated and cannot be traced. In Re Diplock the court gave the example of an innocent volunteer who spent trust money in altering his house to his personal needs without adding one penny to its value.
In cases where value is added to the asset, Lord Browne-Wilkinson said obiter in [ case ] that the trust would not be entitled to a proportion of the value of the asset but ‘at most a proprietary lien’ over the asset. Furthermore the innocent volunteer may have a defence to the claim if it would be inequitable to enforce it
Answer
Foskett v McKeown

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
the court gave the example of an innocent volunteer who spent trust money in altering his house to his personal needs without adding one penny to its value. In cases where value is added to the asset, Lord Browne-Wilkinson said obiter in <span>Foskett v McKeown that the trust would not be entitled to a proportion of the value of the asset but ‘at most a proprietary lien’ over the asset. Furthermore the innocent volunteer may have a defence to t

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378922138892

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The Presumption in [ case ]: dissipated money is that of the trustee who rightfully used his own money
Answer
Re Hallett’s Estate

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The Presumption in Re Hallett’s Estate: dissipated money is that of the trustee who rightfully used his own money

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378923973900

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
In [ case ],T mixed £3,000 of trust money with over £4,000 of his own. He then spent £2137 to buy some Oceana shares for himself when he was not entitled to do this unless and until he had restored the £3000 to the trust, so he could not claim entitlement to the shares. He dissipated the rest of the money in the account. Applying Re Hallett’s Estate as to the imposition of a charge over the fund, Joyce J held that the beneficiaries were entitled to a charge on the Oceana shares (which were worth more than their purchase price but less than the trust money paid into the account).
Answer
Re Oatway [1903] 2 Ch 356

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Re Oatway [1903] 2 Ch 356,T mixed £3,000 of trust money with over £4,000 of his own. He then spent £2137 to buy some Oceana shares for himself when he was not entitled to do this unless and until he had resto

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378926071052

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
In [ case ], however, the claimant (strictly speaking her personal representative) was not allowed a proportionate share of a house bought by the deceased female trustee, apparently inadvertently using some trust money in her account, before she died leaving enough in her residuary estate to cover the amount of the claim. Ungoed-Thomas J was kind to the elderly woman, seemingly regarding her as an ‘innocent’ trustee so that since she could have bought the house without recourse to the trust money, no proportionate share was permitted (though the judge admitted that he would have imposed a lien over the house to secure the money claim if requested). This approach seems fair for innocent volunteers who would have used their own money if they had realised that some of the money being used was trust money, but Mrs Tilley was trustee of her husband’s estate for herself for life remainder for her claimant daughter- and Mrs Tilley was a successful businesswoman
Answer
Re Tilley’s WT [1967] Ch 1179

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Re Tilley’s WT [1967] Ch 1179, however, the claimant (strictly speaking her personal representative) was not allowed a proportionate share of a house bought by the deceased female trustee, apparently inadvertently

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378927906060

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The lowest intermediate balance rule – [ case ]: If the wrongdoer spends the claimant’s money and then pays in money of his own, this money is not deemed to be a repayment to the claimant.
Answer
Roscoe v Winder

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The lowest intermediate balance rule – Roscoe v Winder: If the wrongdoer spends the claimant’s money and then pays in money of his own, this money is not deemed to be a repayment to the claimant.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378930003212

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
It is noticeable that both Tilley and Turner were family disputes that were most unlikely to be appealed, so that, perhaps, the judges allowed themselves a little leeway on the merits of the case , feeling it inequitable to allow the claimant a proportionate share. In Shalson the assets of the claimant had been appropriated by a wrongdoer, who had ultimately dissipated large amounts of the mixed fund. In this sort of scenario it makes sense for the innocent party to be able to claim the wrongdoer used their own assets on these dissipations as far as possible. This dovetails with the general rule of evidence in [ case ] that evidential uncertainty created by wrongdoing will be resolved against the wrongdoer.
Answer
Armory v Delamirie (1722) 1 Stra 505

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
amounts of the mixed fund. In this sort of scenario it makes sense for the innocent party to be able to claim the wrongdoer used their own assets on these dissipations as far as possible. This dovetails with the general rule of evidence in <span>Armory v Delamirie (1722) 1 Stra 505 that evidential uncertainty created by wrongdoing will be resolved against the wrongdoer.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378931838220

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The rules described above for mixing between the claimant’s money and the wrongdoer’s own money do not apply where the claimant’s money is [...]. To discover which rules apply in such instances, it will first be necessary to ascertain whether the account is a deposit account or an active current account.
Answer
mixed with either another trust fund or the money of an innocent volunteer

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The rules described above for mixing between the claimant’s money and the wrongdoer’s own money do not apply where the claimant’s money is mixed with either another trust fund or the money of an innocent volunteer. To discover which rules apply in such instances, it will first be necessary to ascertain whether the account is a deposit account or an active current account. <

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378932886796

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
A trustee has £2,000 of his own money in his deposit account. He puts in £3,000 of Trust B’s money and then £6,000 of Trust C’s money. He spends £6,000 on shares which are now worth £12,000. He then dissipates the remaining £5,000. Later he pays in £1,000.
First look at the situation between the trustee and the trust funds and apply Re Oatway as the later funds are dissipated. This means the £6,000 spent on shares will all be money from the two trusts rather than the trustee’s own money. Then look at the situation between the two trusts. They share rateably ([ case ]), so Trust B has 1/3 rd of the shares (now worth £4,000) and Trust C has 2/3 rd of the shares (now worth £8,000). The dissipated money includes £2,000 from the trustee’s money, £1,000 from Trust B and £2,000 from Trust C. This trust money cannot be replaced by the later payment in of £1,000 (Roscoe v Winder).
Answer
Re Diplock

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ds and apply Re Oatway as the later funds are dissipated. This means the £6,000 spent on shares will all be money from the two trusts rather than the trustee’s own money. Then look at the situation between the two trusts. They share rateably (<span>Re Diplock), so Trust B has 1/3 rd of the shares (now worth £4,000) and Trust C has 2/3 rd of the shares (now worth £8,000). The dissipated money includes £2,000 from the trustee’s money, £1,000 f

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378934721804

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
A trustee has £2,000 of his own money in his deposit account. He puts in £3,000 of Trust B’s money and then £6,000 of Trust C’s money. He spends £6,000 on shares which are now worth £12,000. He then dissipates the remaining £5,000. Later he pays in £1,000.
First look at the situation between the trustee and the trust funds and apply Re Oatway as the later funds are dissipated. This means the £6,000 spent on shares will all be money from the two trusts rather than the trustee’s own money. Then look at the situation between the two trusts. They share rateably (Re Diplock), so Trust B has 1/3 rd of the shares (now worth £4,000) and Trust C has 2/3 rd of the shares (now worth £8,000). The dissipated money includes £2,000 from the trustee’s money, £1,000 from Trust B and £2,000 from Trust C. This trust money cannot be replaced by the later payment in of £1,000 ([ case ]).
Answer
Roscoe v Winder

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
4,000) and Trust C has 2/3 rd of the shares (now worth £8,000). The dissipated money includes £2,000 from the trustee’s money, £1,000 from Trust B and £2,000 from Trust C. This trust money cannot be replaced by the later payment in of £1,000 (<span>Roscoe v Winder).<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378936556812

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
A trustee has £2,000 of his own money in his deposit account. He puts in £3,000 of Trust B’s money and then £6,000 of Trust C’s money. He spends £6,000 on shares which are now worth £12,000. He then dissipates the remaining £5,000. Later he pays in £1,000.
First look at the situation between the trustee and the trust funds and apply [ case ] as the later funds are dissipated. This means the £6,000 spent on shares will all be money from the two trusts rather than the trustee’s own money. Then look at the situation between the two trusts. They share rateably (Re Diplock), so Trust B has 1/3 rd of the shares (now worth £4,000) and Trust C has 2/3 rd of the shares (now worth £8,000). The dissipated money includes £2,000 from the trustee’s money, £1,000 from Trust B and £2,000 from Trust C. This trust money cannot be replaced by the later payment in of £1,000 (Roscoe v Winder).
Answer
Re Oatway

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
y and then £6,000 of Trust C’s money. He spends £6,000 on shares which are now worth £12,000. He then dissipates the remaining £5,000. Later he pays in £1,000. First look at the situation between the trustee and the trust funds and apply <span>Re Oatway as the later funds are dissipated. This means the £6,000 spent on shares will all be money from the two trusts rather than the trustee’s own money. Then look at the situation between the

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378938391820

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
A trustee pays £3,000 of Trust X’s money into his current account which was previously empty. He then pays in £2,000 of his own money and then £5,000 of Trust Y’s money. He withdraws £2,000 and dissipates it. He then withdraws £3,000 and dissipates that money as well. There is £5,000 left in the account.
First look at the situation between the trustee and the trust funds. [ case ] will apply so the first payment out of £2,000 will be the trustee’s own money.
Then look at the situation between the two trust funds. It is a current account, so, according to Re Diplock, the rule in Clayton’s Case applies. The first payment in was from Trust X, so the first payment out of £3,000 is Trust X’s money. Trust Y can claim the £5,000 left in the bank account.
Answer
Re Hallett’s Estate

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
then £5,000 of Trust Y’s money. He withdraws £2,000 and dissipates it. He then withdraws £3,000 and dissipates that money as well. There is £5,000 left in the account. First look at the situation between the trustee and the trust funds. <span>Re Hallett’s Estate will apply so the first payment out of £2,000 will be the trustee’s own money. Then look at the situation between the two trust funds. It is a current account, so, according to Re D

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378940226828

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
A trustee pays £3,000 of Trust X’s money into his current account which was previously empty. He then pays in £2,000 of his own money and then £5,000 of Trust Y’s money. He withdraws £2,000 and dissipates it. He then withdraws £3,000 and dissipates that money as well. There is £5,000 left in the account.
First look at the situation between the trustee and the trust funds. Re Hallett’s Estate will apply so the first payment out of £2,000 will be the trustee’s own money.
Then look at the situation between the two trust funds. It is a current account, so, according to [ case ], the rule in Clayton’s Case applies. The first payment in was from Trust X, so the first payment out of £3,000 is Trust X’s money. Trust Y can claim the £5,000 left in the bank account.
Answer
Re Diplock

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
between the trustee and the trust funds. Re Hallett’s Estate will apply so the first payment out of £2,000 will be the trustee’s own money. Then look at the situation between the two trust funds. It is a current account, so, according to <span>Re Diplock, the rule in Clayton’s Case applies. The first payment in was from Trust X, so the first payment out of £3,000 is Trust X’s money. Trust Y can claim the £5,000 left in the bank account.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378942061836

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
A trustee pays £3,000 of Trust X’s money into his current account which was previously empty. He then pays in £2,000 of his own money and then £5,000 of Trust Y’s money. He withdraws £2,000 and dissipates it. He then withdraws £3,000 and dissipates that money as well. There is £5,000 left in the account.
First look at the situation between the trustee and the trust funds. Re Hallett’s Estate will apply so the first payment out of £2,000 will be the trustee’s own money.
Then look at the situation between the two trust funds. It is a current account, so, according to Re Diplock, the rule in [ case ] applies. The first payment in was from Trust X, so the first payment out of £3,000 is Trust X’s money. Trust Y can claim the £5,000 left in the bank account.
Answer
Clayton’s Case

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
the trust funds. Re Hallett’s Estate will apply so the first payment out of £2,000 will be the trustee’s own money. Then look at the situation between the two trust funds. It is a current account, so, according to Re Diplock, the rule in <span>Clayton’s Case applies. The first payment in was from Trust X, so the first payment out of £3,000 is Trust X’s money. Trust Y can claim the £5,000 left in the bank account.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378943896844

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Note that, although the rule in [ case ] applies to a claim between two (or more) trusts and to a claim between a trust and an innocent contributor (Re Diplock and, obiter, in Re Hallett’s Estate), it does not apply as between beneficiaries and the trustee who has mixed trust funds with funds of his own (Re Hallett’s Estate).
Answer
Clayton’s Case

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Note that, although the rule in Clayton’s Case applies to a claim between two (or more) trusts and to a claim between a trust and an innocent contributor (Re Diplock and, obiter, in Re Hallett’s Estate), it does not apply as betw

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378945731852

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Note that, although the rule in Clayton’s Case applies to a claim between two (or more) trusts and to a claim between a trust and an innocent contributor (Re Diplock and, obiter, in Re Hallett’s Estate), it does not apply as between beneficiaries and the trustee who has mixed trust funds with funds of his own ([ case ]).
Answer
Re Hallett’s Estate

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
two (or more) trusts and to a claim between a trust and an innocent contributor (Re Diplock and, obiter, in Re Hallett’s Estate), it does not apply as between beneficiaries and the trustee who has mixed trust funds with funds of his own (<span>Re Hallett’s Estate).<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378947566860

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Note that, although the rule in Clayton’s Case applies to a claim between two (or more) trusts and to a claim between a trust and an innocent contributor ([ case ] and, obiter, in Re Hallett’s Estate), it does not apply as between beneficiaries and the trustee who has mixed trust funds with funds of his own (Re Hallett’s Estate).
Answer
Re Diplock

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Note that, although the rule in Clayton’s Case applies to a claim between two (or more) trusts and to a claim between a trust and an innocent contributor (Re Diplock and, obiter, in Re Hallett’s Estate), it does not apply as between beneficiaries and the trustee who has mixed trust funds with funds of his own (Re Hallett’s Estate).<

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378949401868

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
More recently, in [ case ], Henderson J disapplied Clayton’s Case when distributing the assets of a fundraising website but nevertheless considered that case to be ‘probably still the default rule’ (para 49).
Answer
Charity Commission v Framjee [2014] EWHC 2507 (Ch)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
More recently, in Charity Commission v Framjee [2014] EWHC 2507 (Ch), Henderson J disapplied Clayton’s Case when distributing the assets of a fundraising website but nevertheless considered that case to be ‘probably still the default rule’ (para 49).</

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378951236876

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
While at common law there will always be a restitutionary personal action against the recipient of the claimant’s property, this is not the case in equity. There will be no personal action against an innocent volunteer who dissipated trust property before he was aware that it was such ([ case ]; Independent Trustee Services Ltd v GP Noble Trustees Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 195 at [76], [84]). A personal action will only arise against a recipient whose knowledge of the provenance of the property would make it unconscionable for him not to return it but deal with it as his own. Bank of Credit and Commerce International v Akindele [2001] Ch 437
Answer
Re Montagu’s Settlement [1987] 1Ch 264

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
estitutionary personal action against the recipient of the claimant’s property, this is not the case in equity. There will be no personal action against an innocent volunteer who dissipated trust property before he was aware that it was such (<span>Re Montagu’s Settlement [1987] 1Ch 264; Independent Trustee Services Ltd v GP Noble Trustees Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 195 at [76], [84]). A personal action will only arise against a recipient whose knowledge of the provenance of

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378953071884

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
While at common law there will always be a restitutionary personal action against the recipient of the claimant’s property, this is not the case in equity. There will be no personal action against an innocent volunteer who dissipated trust property before he was aware that it was such (Re Montagu’s Settlement [1987] 1Ch 264; Independent Trustee Services Ltd v GP Noble Trustees Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 195 at [76], [84]). A personal action will only arise against a recipient whose knowledge of the provenance of the property would make it unconscionable for him not to return it but deal with it as his own. [ case ]
Answer
Bank of Credit and Commerce International v Akindele [2001] Ch 437

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Noble Trustees Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 195 at [76], [84]). A personal action will only arise against a recipient whose knowledge of the provenance of the property would make it unconscionable for him not to return it but deal with it as his own. <span>Bank of Credit and Commerce International v Akindele [2001] Ch 437<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378954906892

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
A proprietary claim may not be allowed if it is inequitable. In [ case ] the charity, a hospital, had spent the money improving its own pre-owned property. The next- of-kin’s interest in the property would have been a charge, enforceable by sale. The Court of Appeal did not allow this on the grounds that it would have been inequitable to force a sale.
Answer
Re Diplock’s Estate

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
A proprietary claim may not be allowed if it is inequitable. In Re Diplock’s Estate the charity, a hospital, had spent the money improving its own pre-owned property. The next- of-kin’s interest in the property would have been a charge, enforceable by sale. The Court of

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378956741900

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The Court of Appeal in Re Diplock held that, where money is wrongly paid out in the administration of an estate, a personal action is available against those who received the money. This was affirmed by the House of Lords on appeal where the case became [ case ]. As a result, the next of kin were able to use the personal action to recover the balance of the Diplock money (£203,000 less £15,000 paid by the executors from their own pockets) from the charities even where proprietary claims were not possible. The Court of Appeal stated that this remedy is subject to two limitations:
  1. The unpaid beneficiaries should firstly sue the personal representative who has acted wrongly, the beneficiaries’ personal claim against those overpaid, or wrongly paid, being limited to the amount which cannot be recovered from the personal representative.
  2. The entitlement is to claim the principal sum only, not the interest on it. In Re Diplock, which was affirmed by Ministry of Health v Simpson, no defence was allowed to the personal claim.
However since then the House of Lords has developed the defence of change of position in Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale and it is generally accepted that this defence would be applicable to such a claim.
Answer
Ministry of Health v Simpson [1951] AC 251

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
f Appeal in Re Diplock held that, where money is wrongly paid out in the administration of an estate, a personal action is available against those who received the money. This was affirmed by the House of Lords on appeal where the case became <span>Ministry of Health v Simpson [1951] AC 251. As a result, the next of kin were able to use the personal action to recover the balance of the Diplock money (£203,000 less £15,000 paid by the executors from their own pockets) from

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378958576908

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
Certain people are excluded from falling within the ambit of conspiracy: [ statute ].
  1. An accused cannot conspire with a person who is his spouse at the time of the agreement.
  2. An accused cannot conspire with a child under ten years old.
  3. An accused cannot conspire with an intended victim of the crime.
Answer
CLA 1977, s 2(2)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Certain people are excluded from falling within the ambit of conspiracy: CLA 1977, s 2(2). An accused cannot conspire with a person who is his spouse at the time of the agreement. An accused cannot conspire with a child under ten years old. An accused cannot conspire w

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378960411916

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
Following [ case ], the defendant need not have settled all the details of the offence in question but must have gone beyond merely discussing the offence and actually agreed to commit it.
Answer
DPP v Nock [1978] AC 979

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Following DPP v Nock [1978] AC 979, the defendant need not have settled all the details of the offence in question but must have gone beyond merely discussing the offence and actually agreed to commit it.<

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378962246924

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
Following DPP v Nock [1978] AC 979, the defendant need not have settled all the details of the offence in question but must have gone [...].
Answer
beyond merely discussing the offence and actually agreed to commit it

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Following DPP v Nock [1978] AC 979, the defendant need not have settled all the details of the offence in question but must have gone beyond merely discussing the offence and actually agreed to commit it.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378963295500

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
statutory conspiracy contrary to the [ statute ]
Answer
Criminal Law Act 1977, s 1

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
statutory conspiracy contrary to the Criminal Law Act 1977, s 1

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378965130508

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
[ case ]
FACTS: D had joined in a conspiracy to plant a bomb, timed to explode on the roof of a hall at 1am when a disco would be at its height. He claimed that, unknown to his accomplices, he intended to give a warning enabling the hall to be cleared.
HELD: The Court of Appeal of Northern Ireland held per Lowry LJ:

'In regard to the offence of statutory conspiracy s 1(1) assumes the existence of an intention of the parties to carry out the agreement. But on the facts found here, this result [murder] would not have been in accordance with the intention of the appellant. Therefore he was not guilty of conspiracy to murder.'

Answer
R v McPhillips [1990] 6 BNIL (NICA)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
R v McPhillips [1990] 6 BNIL (NICA) FACTS: D had joined in a conspiracy to plant a bomb, timed to explode on the roof of a hall at 1am when a disco would be at its height. He claimed that, unknown to his accomplices, he in

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378966965516

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
R v McPhillips [1990] 6 BNIL (NICA)
FACTS: D had joined in a conspiracy to plant a bomb, timed to explode on the roof of a hall at 1am when a disco would be at its height. He claimed that, unknown to his accomplices, he intended to give a warning enabling the hall to be cleared.
HELD: The Court of Appeal of Northern Ireland held per Lowry LJ:

'In regard to the offence of statutory conspiracy s 1(1) assumes the existence of an [...]. But on the facts found here, this result [murder] would not have been in accordance with the intention of the appellant. Therefore he was not guilty of conspiracy to murder.'

Answer
intention of the parties to carry out the agreement

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ccomplices, he intended to give a warning enabling the hall to be cleared. HELD: The Court of Appeal of Northern Ireland held per Lowry LJ: 'In regard to the offence of statutory conspiracy s 1(1) assumes the existence of an <span>intention of the parties to carry out the agreement. But on the facts found here, this result [murder] would not have been in accordance with the intention of the appellant. Therefore he was not guilty of conspiracy to murder.' &#

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378968014092

Tags
#conspiracy #crime #inchoate #law
Question
[ case ]
FACTS: This case involved a conspiracy to effect an escape from prison. The defendant, who was about to be released from prison agreed to supply a fellow prisoner with equipment to cut through the cell bars. He did not succeed in doing so as shortly after being released from prison he was injured in a car crash. Anderson admitted that he intended to supply the cutting equipment, but argued in his defence that he never intended the plan to be carried out and that he did not believe that it could succeed.
HELD: The House of Lords said that this was irrelevant, and they confirmed the conviction.
Lord Bridge said that Parliament could not have intended such a person to escape liability on the basis of lack of intent:

'I am clearly driven to reject any construction of the statutory language which would require the prosecution to prove an intention on the part of each conspirator that the criminal offence which will necessarily be committed by one or more of the conspirators if the agreed course of conduct is fully carried out should in fact be committed.'

However, the Court of Appeal has appeared to overlook Lord Bridge's dicta on several occasions, preferring to follow the wording from the statute. Anderson is not likely to be applied by in the future, because it is clearly wrong.
Answer
R v Anderson [1986] AC 27

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
R v Anderson [1986] AC 27 FACTS: This case involved a conspiracy to effect an escape from prison. The defendant, who was about to be released from prison agreed to supply a fellow prisoner with equipment to cut t

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378969849100

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
[ case ]
FACTS: A and W were charged with conspiracy to murder. W recruited A to find someone to kill C. The person that A found went to the police and subsequently recorded conversations with both A and W using a concealed tape recorder. A said that although there was an ostensible agreement to kill C, he was motivated by friendship for W and he did not intend to carry out the agreement and was keeping everything under his control.
HELD: The court held that A was not guilty of conspiracy without giving reasons.
Answer
R v Ashton [1992] Crim LR 667

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
R v Ashton [1992] Crim LR 667 FACTS: A and W were charged with conspiracy to murder. W recruited A to find someone to kill C. The person that A found went to the police and subsequently recorded conversations with bo

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378971684108

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
[ case ]
FACTS: D agreed to supply amphetamine but it may have been that he did not intend to carry out the agreement.
HELD: It was held that the judge had rightly directed the jury that D could not be convicted of conspiracy to supply amphetamine unless he intended to carry out the agreement to do so.
Answer
R v Edwards [1991] Crim LR 45

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
R v Edwards [1991] Crim LR 45 FACTS: D agreed to supply amphetamine but it may have been that he did not intend to carry out the agreement. HELD: It was held that the judge had rightly directed the jury that D c

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378973519116

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
[ case ]:

'We think it obvious that Lord Bridge cannot have been intending that the organiser of a crime who recruited others to carry it out would not himself be guilty of conspiracy unless it could be proved that he intended to play some active part himself thereafter. The nub of the offence of conspiracy consists of the agreement to do the unlawful act, and that may mean that you are doing it yourself actively or that you are agreeing that somebody else should do it actively. In either event, you are guilty of conspiracy.' (Per O'Connor LJ.)

Answer
R v Siracusa (1990) 90 Cr App R 340

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
R v Siracusa (1990) 90 Cr App R 340: 'We think it obvious that Lord Bridge cannot have been intending that the organiser of a crime who recruited others to carry it out would not himself be guilty of conspira

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378975354124

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
Although for the time being Anderson represents the law, it is thought unlikely that it would be followed by a future House of Lords. It is also worth noting that the Draft Criminal Code reasserts the traditional view of conspiracy in clause 48, which specifically requires proof that [...].
Answer
a person charged with conspiracy, and at least one other party to the agreement, must have intended the offence to be committed

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ts the law, it is thought unlikely that it would be followed by a future House of Lords. It is also worth noting that the Draft Criminal Code reasserts the traditional view of conspiracy in clause 48, which specifically requires proof that <span>a person charged with conspiracy, and at least one other party to the agreement, must have intended the offence to be committed.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378976402700

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
In any case where:
  • (a) apart from this subsection a person's intention would not be regarded as having amounted to an intent to commit an offence ([ statute ]); but
  • (b) if the facts of the case had been as he believed them to be, his intention would be so regarded. then, for the purposes of subsection (1) above, he shall be regarded as having had an intent to commit that offence.' (CAA 1981, s 1(3)(b))
Answer
CAA 1981, s 1(3)(a)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In any case where: (a) apart from this subsection a person's intention would not be regarded as having amounted to an intent to commit an offence (CAA 1981, s 1(3)(a)); but (b) if the facts of the case had been as he believed them to be, his intention would be so regarded. then, for the purposes of subsection (1) above, he shall be regarded as having

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378978237708

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
In any case where:
  • (a) apart from this subsection a person's intention would not be regarded as having amounted to an intent to commit an offence (CAA 1981, s 1(3)(a)); but
  • (b) if the facts of the case had been as he believed them to be, his intention would be so regarded. then, for the purposes of subsection (1) above, he shall be regarded as having had an intent to commit that offence.' ([ statute ])
Answer
CAA 1981, s 1(3)(b)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
1981, s 1(3)(a)); but (b) if the facts of the case had been as he believed them to be, his intention would be so regarded. then, for the purposes of subsection (1) above, he shall be regarded as having had an intent to commit that offence.' (<span>CAA 1981, s 1(3)(b))<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378980072716

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
The question of whether the actions of the accused are more than merely preparatory is one of fact to be decided by the jury, providing the judge is satisfied that the actions are capable of being more than merely preparatory: [ statute ].
Answer
CAA 1981, s 4(3)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
y>The question of whether the actions of the accused are more than merely preparatory is one of fact to be decided by the jury, providing the judge is satisfied that the actions are capable of being more than merely preparatory: CAA 1981, s 4(3).<body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378981907724

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
[ case ] HELD: If the substantive offence has the mens rea of either intention or recklessness as to the actus reus, to convict of the attempted offence proof of intention is required.
Answer
R v Toole

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
R v Toole HELD: If the substantive offence has the mens rea of either intention or recklessness as to the actus reus, to convict of the attempted offence proof of intention is required. </

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378983742732

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
R v Toole HELD: If the substantive offence has the mens rea of [...] as to the actus reus, to convict of the attempted offence proof of intention is required.
Answer
either intention or recklessness

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
R v Toole HELD: If the substantive offence has the mens rea of either intention or recklessness as to the actus reus, to convict of the attempted offence proof of intention is required.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378984791308

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
R v Toole HELD: If the substantive offence has the mens rea of either intention or recklessness as to the actus reus, to convict of the attempted offence proof of [...] is required.
Answer
intention

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
R v Toole HELD: If the substantive offence has the mens rea of either intention or recklessness as to the actus reus, to convict of the attempted offence proof of intention is required.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378985839884

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
The accused must intend to bring about [...]. This can be illustrated by the case of R v Whybrow. Here, the charge was attempted murder and therefore it was necessary to prove that the defendant intended to kill, not merely to cause GBH.
Answer
the consequences required for the full offence

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The accused must intend to bring about the consequences required for the full offence. This can be illustrated by the case of R v Whybrow. Here, the charge was attempted murder and therefore it was necessary to prove that the defendant intended to kill, not merely to c

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1378986888460

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
The accused must intend to bring about the consequences required for the full offence. Thi