All Cases

Prerogative powers cannot be used to trigger Article 50 TEU without an Act of Parliament, as doing so would remove statutory rights conferred by the European Communities Act 1972.

Employment tribunal fees of up to £1,200 were quashed as unlawful after causing a 66–70% drop in claims, violating the constitutional right of access to justice and frustrating Parliament's employment rights legislation.

Contributory negligence under the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 cannot be used to reduce damages for intentional torts of assault and battery. The court also held that a judge must engage consistently with a preferred expert's causation findings.

A booking agency's website post criticising performers' professionalism was held sufficient to support a fair comment defence, as the comment need only indicate in general terms the facts on which it is based.

Convictions based solely or decisively on untested hearsay evidence do not necessarily breach Article 6 ECHR, as English law's Criminal Justice Act 2003 safeguards are sufficient without applying the ECtHR's sole or decisive rule.

A local authority challenged a PCT's refusal to fund an adult's continuing healthcare, raising the Wednesbury unreasonableness standard in inter-authority NHS funding disputes.

A prosecution witness was murdered before trial after reporting suspicious calls to police. The House of Lords held the Osman 'real and immediate risk' threshold was not satisfied, finding no breach of Article 2 ECHR.

Fox-hunting campaigners challenged the validity of the Hunting Act 2004, arguing the Parliament Act 1949 — used to pass it — was itself unlawfully enacted. The House of Lords unanimously rejected the challenge, while several Law Lords delivered landmark obiter remarks questioning the absolute nature of parliamentary sovereignty.

Indefinite detention of non-UK terror suspects without charge under s 23 ATCSA 2001 was held disproportionate and discriminatory under Articles 5 and 14 ECHR, with the House of Lords issuing a landmark declaration of incompatibility.

A surgeon's failure to warn of a 1–2% paralysis risk was held sufficient to establish causation, even though the risk would have been identical had surgery been performed later — patient autonomy justified departure from orthodox but-for causation.

A same-sex partner was entitled to succeed to a full statutory tenancy under the Rent Act 1977, as s 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 required 'spouse' to be read compatibly with Articles 8 and 14 ECHR.

A mother and her disabled son were unlawfully strip-searched in prison. The House of Lords held English common law recognises no general tort of invasion of privacy, and the Wilkinson v Downton claim failed for lack of intent.

Market traders prosecuted for using imperial measures argued the Weights and Measures Act 1985 had impliedly repealed the ECA 1972. The court rejected this, holding constitutional statutes can only be repealed expressly.

The Secretary of State's power to fix the tariff for mandatory life sentence prisoners was incompatible with Article 6(1) ECHR, as he was not an independent and impartial tribunal. A declaration of incompatibility was issued under s 4 HRA 1998.

Where evidence of a prior consensual sexual relationship between defendant and complainant is so relevant to consent that its exclusion would render the trial unfair, s 41 YJCEA 1999 must be read under s 3 HRA 1998 to admit it.

At a no-reserve auction, a collateral contract obliges the auctioneer to sell to the highest bona fide bidder; withdrawing a lot because the bid is too low breaches that contract and entitles the bidder to damages.

A former Irish Taoiseach sued The Sunday Times for defamation. The House of Lords rejected a blanket qualified privilege for political information, instead applying a responsible journalism test under the duty-interest framework.

Repeated silent telephone calls causing psychiatric injury can constitute assault occasioning actual bodily harm — psychiatric illness falls within 'bodily harm' under ss 20 and 47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.

A blanket rule barring negligence claims against the police violated Article 6(1) ECHR as disproportionate. The case also established the 'Osman test' for Article 2 positive obligations — requiring a real and immediate risk to an identified individual.

A defamatory headline or photograph cannot found a libel claim if the accompanying article, read as a whole, negates any defamatory meaning — the 'whole publication' principle.

Statutory qualifying thresholds for part-time workers' unfair dismissal and redundancy rights were held to indirectly discriminate against women and incompatible with EEC Treaty Article 119, as the Secretary of State failed to objectively justify them.

A minister cannot use royal prerogative to introduce a tariff compensation scheme while an unrepealed statutory scheme remains on the books, as doing so constitutes an abuse of power amenable to judicial review.

A company's promise to repay tax arrears by instalments failed as good consideration — the Court of Appeal held Williams v Roffey cannot extend to money obligations, leaving Foakes v Beer intact.

A minister of the Crown acting in official capacity is subject to the court's supervisory jurisdiction, including injunctions and contempt proceedings — the executive obeys the law as necessity, not grace.

Despite police awareness of escalating harassment by a schoolteacher, public policy barred imposing a duty of care on police for failing to apprehend him before he shot the Osman family.

The royal prerogative of mercy is susceptible to judicial review. A Home Secretary who considers only a free pardon, without examining other forms such as a conditional pardon, commits an error of law.

A pregnant employee hired to cover maternity leave was dismissed when her own pregnancy was discovered. The House of Lords examined direct and indirect sex discrimination before referring the case to the ECJ.

Spanish fishing vessel owners challenged the Merchant Shipping Act 1988, leading the House of Lords to disapply an Act of Parliament for the first time to protect Community law rights pending an ECJ ruling.

A newspaper letter responding to an article was held to be assessable as a standalone publication. Words in the letter were capable of being read as statements of fact, not mere comment, so the fair comment defence could not be withdrawn from the jury.

A carpenter's promise to complete existing work can constitute valid consideration where the other party gains a practical benefit — such as avoiding delay penalties — from the renegotiation.

A council's failure to consider a timely tender, due to its own staff's error, breached an implied contractual obligation arising from a selective, structured invitation to tender.

A doctor may lawfully treat an incapacitated adult patient without consent, provided the treatment is in their best interests — assessed by the Bolam standard. Court authorisation via declaration is strongly recommended for proposed sterilisation.

Police investigating a serial killer owed no duty of care to his final victim. Established the Hill immunity: no proximity between police and general public in crime investigation.

Employees dismissed one hour before a business transfer were held to be protected under TUPE 1981, as the House of Lords implied words into reg 5(3) to prevent evasion of EU Directive 77/187 protections.

Female warehouse operatives were entitled to bring an equal value claim against a higher-paid male comparator, even though the employer could point to other male employees doing like work with them.

Refusing a passport under royal prerogative is subject to judicial review where the decision affects individual rights such as freedom of travel, not high foreign policy.

A referential bid in a sealed tender process is invalid — vendors who bind themselves to accept the highest offer create a unilateral contract requiring a fixed, self-contained sum.

A schoolboy pulling another's bag in a corridor raised the question of whether battery requires hostile intent — the Court of Appeal held that intentional touching must be shown to be hostile, though hostility is a question of fact.

Prolonged mutual silence and inactivity over five years cannot amount to acceptance of an implied offer to abandon arbitration proceedings or found a promissory estoppel.

A sliding tackle in a local football match broke the claimant's leg, establishing that sport participants owe each other a duty of care in negligence — assessed objectively but adjusted to the level of competition.

The GCHQ case established that prerogative powers can be subject to judicial review based on justiciability, confirmed legitimate expectation as a ground for review, and authoritatively set out illegality, irrationality, and procedural impropriety as the three heads of judicial review.

Where acceptance is communicated by telex or other instantaneous means, the contract is formed when and where the acceptance is received by the offeror — not where it was sent.

A female employee's exclusion from post-retirement travel benefits enjoyed by male colleagues' families was held to violate EEC Treaty Article 119, with the House of Lords adopting the statutory construction consistent with Community law obligations.

Canadian Indian chiefs challenged the Canada Act 1982 as ultra vires, but the Court of Appeal held that an express declaration of Dominion consent in a statute conclusively satisfies s 4 Statute of Westminster 1931, and English courts have no power to invalidate an Act of Parliament.

Where a patient understands the general nature of a medical procedure and consents, that consent is real and defeats any trespass claim — inadequate risk disclosure sounds only in negligence.

A female employee earning £50/week claimed equal pay with her male predecessor earning £60/week, leading the Court of Appeal to confirm that EU law overrides inconsistent UK domestic legislation.

A seller's return of a buyer's tear-off acknowledgment slip constituted acceptance of the buyer's counter-offer, meaning no price variation clause applied — establishing the 'last shot' rule in battle of forms disputes.

Cabinet Ministers' opinions expressed in discussions are protected by a duty of confidence, but only so long as disclosure would still undermine collective Cabinet responsibility — a functional, not a fixed time-based, test.

A payment of £1 is legally sufficient consideration to render an option to purchase land a binding, irrevocable offer. On exercise, specific performance lies for the contract of sale — not the option — making the adequacy of the option consideration irrelevant.

A telex withdrawal notice is received when it arrives at the recipient's premises during business hours, regardless of whether it is read. Payment by telex transfer is only complete when the bank debits and credits the relevant accounts.

Where an option clause requires 'notice in writing to' the defendant, merely posting a letter is insufficient — actual communication is needed, displacing the postal rule.

Courts cannot go behind an Act of Parliament to investigate whether Parliament was misled during the legislative process — any remedy lies with Parliament itself, not the courts.

A seller who accepts a non-conforming letter of credit expressed in a different currency without objection, and draws upon it for successive shipments, waives the contractual right to insist on the original currency — or agrees a binding variation of the contract.

The Crown's power to sign treaties, including the Treaty of Rome, is a prerogative beyond court review. Courts will not make declarations on hypothetical future parliamentary acts.

A written agreement between separated spouses to transfer the matrimonial home was held to be a binding contract, as the presumption against legal intent does not apply where parties are no longer living in amity.

A theatrical producer's press letter alleging a 'plot' by four artists to end his play's run was held to be an unproven statement of fact, not fair comment — defeating the defence even on a matter of public interest.

Following Southern Rhodesia's unlawful Unilateral Declaration of Independence, the Privy Council held that the illegal regime's emergency detention regulations were void, and that no convention could limit Parliament's absolute legal sovereignty over the territory.

A taxpayer argued that income tax assessments were unlawful because revenues funded nuclear weapons contrary to the Geneva Conventions. The court held that unincorporated international conventions cannot override clear domestic statute, and tax charges are valid regardless of how the revenue is spent.

A savage retaliatory punch causing serious eye injury does not entitle the defendant to reduce damages on grounds of provocation, volenti, or contributory negligence in a trespass to the person claim.

A classified advertisement in a periodical is an invitation to treat, not an offer for sale — so placing an ad cannot constitute the criminal offence of 'offering for sale' under statute.

A body incorporated by Royal Charter is not automatically an agent of the Crown. The BBC could not claim Crown immunity from income tax as it was an independent legal persona, not an instrument of government.

Deliberate pre-planned destruction of private oil installations to deny resources to advancing Japanese forces gave rise to a right to compensation from the Crown, even when exercising the royal prerogative in wartime.

A creditor who accepts a lesser sum under financial duress is not bound by that agreement. Promissory estoppel cannot be invoked by a party who acted inequitably to extract the settlement.

A hire-purchaser who failed to prove any alteration of position in reliance on the owner's promise could not invoke promissory estoppel as a defence to outstanding instalments.

A promise to pay an 'ex gratia' sum in a commercial redundancy agreement was held legally binding — the phrase merely disclaimed prior liability, not future enforceability.

A sunbather injured by a car establishes that unintentional personal injury claims must be brought in negligence, not trespass to the person, and the three-year limitation period cannot be circumvented by reframing the cause of action.

Displaying a flick knife in a shop window with a price ticket is an invitation to treat, not an offer for sale — so no criminal offence was committed under the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act 1959.

Chocolate wrappers thrown away upon receipt were still held to form part of the consideration for a record sale — consideration need not be adequate, only legally sufficient.

A written promise to bequeath property if relatives sold their home and moved in was held legally binding — the couple's irreversible detrimental reliance rebutted the domestic presumption against legal intent.

A patient suffered severe fractures during ECT treatment, establishing the Bolam Test: a doctor is not negligent if acting in accordance with a practice accepted by a responsible body of skilled medical opinion.

A contract formed by telex is concluded at the place and time the offeror receives the acceptance — not when the offeree sends it. The postal rule does not apply to instantaneous communications.

A lodger and her landlady jointly entered a newspaper fashion competition for eight weeks. When their entry won £750, the court held the arrangement was a legally binding contract despite its domestic setting.

A voluntary suspension of compensation payments under a patent licence did not permanently extinguish the right to resume them — reasonable notice, given by counterclaim, was sufficient to revive strict legal rights.

Displaying goods on shelves in a self-service shop is an invitation to treat, not an offer. The contract is formed at the cash desk when the cashier accepts the customer's offer to buy.

A father's promise to convey a house upon full mortgage repayment created an irrevocable contractual licence, protecting the daughter-in-law's right to remain in possession as long as she continued making payments.

Promissory estoppel cannot substitute for consideration or create a new cause of action — it operates as a shield to prevent enforcement of strict legal rights, not as a sword to found a claim.

A wartime rent reduction promise was held binding by estoppel, establishing that a clear promise not to enforce legal rights suspends — but does not extinguish — those rights while the underlying conditions persist.

Where a party agreed to pay a balance on 'hire-purchase terms over 2 years' without specifying the precise conditions, the House of Lords held no binding contract existed due to the uncertainty of the terms.

A telegram asking for money 'borrowed' from a housemaid was held incapable of bearing a defamatory meaning, establishing the right-thinking members of society test for defamation.

Parliament cannot bind itself as to the form of future legislation. A later Act inconsistent with an earlier one repeals it by implication, regardless of any entrenchment clause in the earlier statute.

A statement is defamatory if it causes a person to be shunned or avoided by right-thinking society, even where the claimant bears no moral fault — and a cinematographic film constitutes libel, not slander.

A colonial legislature may validly entrench constitutional provisions by prescribing a mandatory referendum as a 'manner and form' requirement — any Bill passed without compliance is a nullity.

A timber purchase option clause was held enforceable despite apparent vagueness — courts must construe commercial contracts fairly and broadly, giving effect to the parties' intentions through trade usage and implication.

A later Act of Parliament necessarily repeals an earlier inconsistent Act by implication, and no entrenchment clause in an earlier statute can prevent this constitutional outcome.

Performing the act specified in a unilateral offer does not constitute acceptance unless the offeree acts in knowledge of, and in reliance upon, the offer.

When police provide services exceeding what they consider necessary to fulfil their public duty, that additional performance constitutes valid consideration for a private promise of payment.

An honourable pledge clause expressly excluding legal jurisdiction prevents a commercial arrangement from being a binding contract, yet individual accepted orders within that arrangement can still form separate enforceable contracts.

Where Parliament has legislated over a subject previously governed by royal prerogative, the Crown must act within the statutory framework and cannot revert to prerogative to avoid compensation obligations imposed by statute.

A husband's promise to pay his wife £30 monthly maintenance was held unenforceable — spouses living in amity are presumed to lack the intention to create legal relations.

A school board's internal resolution to appoint a headmaster was communicated by an unauthorised board member, not the board itself — no binding contract was formed.

A defendant falsely told a woman her husband had been badly injured in an accident. The court held that wilfully causing physical harm — including nervous shock — constitutes an actionable wrong even without physical impact.

A landowner who diverts percolating underground water beneath his own land commits no wrong, even if his dominant motive is to coerce a neighbour into buying his water rights.

A newspaper advertisement promising £100 to anyone who contracted influenza after using a smoke ball as directed was held to be a binding unilateral offer, not a mere puff.

Past consideration is valid where the prior act was performed at the promisor's express request and remuneration was always contemplated. The letter operated as an immediate equitable assignment of a one-third patent share.

Forbearance from exercising a legal right — such as refraining from drinking and gambling — constitutes valid consideration for a promise, regardless of whether the promisor actually receives any benefit.

A gate-keeper negligently invited travellers across a level crossing into the path of a train. The Privy Council held that nervous shock unaccompanied by physical injury is too remote to found a negligence claim.

Paying a sum already owed under a judgment cannot constitute good consideration for a creditor's promise to forgo interest, confirming the rule in Pinnel's Case.

A revocation of an offer posted before acceptance was communicated takes no legal effect until actually received by the offeree — the postal rule applies to acceptances only, not revocations.

A telegram asking whether different delivery terms might be available is a mere inquiry, not a counter-offer, leaving the original offer open for acceptance until revocation is actually communicated.

A letter of allotment was posted but never received by the defendant. The Court of Appeal held that acceptance is complete upon posting, binding both parties even if the letter is lost in the post.

A binding contract can be formed through the conduct of the parties, even without formal written acceptance — ordering and paying for goods at a draft contract price constitutes acceptance of a counter-offer.

Where a lessor enters into negotiations after serving a notice to repair, those negotiations suspend the notice period — equity will relieve against a forfeiture brought before the suspended period has properly run.

An offer to sell property can be revoked before acceptance without formal notice — knowledge of the offeror's inconsistent act through a reliable third party is sufficient to constitute revocation.

A pre-existing debt owed to a bank constitutes sufficient consideration, and the court established the foundational definition that consideration may be a benefit to one party or a detriment suffered by the other.

A public reward offer may be validly revoked through the same official channel in which it was made, and a claimant who acts after revocation has no rights under the offer — even if unaware of the withdrawal.

A seller's passive silence about a buyer's mistaken belief does not entitle the buyer to avoid the contract — caveat emptor applies where no warranty was given and no fraud was committed.

Silence cannot amount to acceptance of an offer — an offeror has no right to unilaterally impose silence as a binding mode of acceptance upon the offeree.

Performing an obligation already owed to a third party under a prior contract can constitute valid consideration for a separate promise made by a different party who benefits from that performance.

A son-in-law could not enforce a written agreement made between his father and father-in-law for his benefit, establishing that consideration must move from the promisee and that strangers to a contract cannot sue upon it.

When a ship's crew was reduced from 36 to 19 hands, rendering the voyage dangerous, the remaining seamen were discharged from their original contract and could validly agree to extra wages as fresh consideration.

A conditional threat — 'leave or I'll break your neck' — combined with workmen surrounding the claimant in a menacing posture was held to constitute assault in tort, even without physical contact.

A son's promise to stop complaining about his father's distribution of property was held not to constitute valid consideration, as he had no legal right to complain in the first place.

A duly enacted Act of Parliament binds all affected parties even if passed without proper notice to an interested party, and courts have no power to strike it down for procedural irregularities in its parliamentary passage.

A warranty given after a horse sale was unenforceable because the completed purchase could not provide valid consideration for a new promise made after the fact.

A counter-offer operates as a rejection of the original offer, extinguishing it entirely — the offeree cannot later revert to accepting the original terms once a counter-offer has been made.

Establishes the foundational common law definition of libel and confirms that judges define libel in law while juries decide whether the publication meets that definition as fact.

Fulfilling the conditions of a public reward offer entitles the claimant to payment, even where their motive for performance was not to obtain the reward — only knowledge of the offer is required.

Attending court under a subpoena is a duty imposed by law, meaning compliance cannot constitute valid consideration for a promise to pay compensation for loss of time.

An offeror who grants a fixed period for acceptance may still revoke the offer at any time before acceptance occurs — granting time alone does not bind the offeror without consideration.

A wool dealer misdirected his offer letter, causing delay. The court held that posting an acceptance completes a contract immediately — the foundation of the postal rule.

Performing duties already owed under an existing contract cannot constitute valid consideration for a promise of extra pay — the captain's promise of additional wages to remaining crew after desertion was unenforceable.

Calling someone a 'swindler' in print is actionable libel. A plea of justification must particularise the persons deceived, the transactions, and the time and place of each alleged fraud — vague general allegations are insufficient.

State power must be grounded in positive legal authority — if a power cannot be found in law, it does not exist. Unlawful general warrants issued by the Secretary of State could not justify entry, search, or seizure of private papers.

A defendant who responds to a minor blow with a maiming injury cannot rely on the plea of son assault demesne — self-defence requires proportionality between the initial assault and the retaliatory force used.

An occupier cannot immediately use physical force against a trespasser who enters by mere legal trespass — a prior request to leave is required. Only actual force (e.g. breaking a door) justifies an immediate physical response.

Placing a hand on a sword while stating no intent to attack does not constitute assault — both the act and the intention must be present simultaneously.

An act performed at the promisor's express prior request can constitute valid consideration, even if the promise to pay comes later — past consideration is not bare where a prior request exists.

The King cannot create new offences or alter the common law by royal proclamation alone — only Parliament holds that power. A foundational rule of law authority.

The King cannot personally adjudicate any legal cause, criminal or civil. All matters must be determined by courts of justice applying the artificial reason of the law, not the sovereign's natural reason.

Payment of a lesser sum on the due date cannot in law satisfy a greater debt — but early payment, payment at a different place, or a non-monetary gift may constitute valid satisfaction.

A tenant's unpaid rent covenant was sued upon for an inflated sum; the court held that only proper damages are recoverable in covenant, and any excess claimed must be abated.

After the Norman Conquest, Archbishop Ealdred used his privileged royal access to recover lands seized by the High Sheriff of Yorkshire — an early example of informal dispute resolution before the Common Law existed.