Constitution in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Doody ; R v Same, ex parte Pierson ; R v Same, ex parte Smart ; R v Same, ex parte Pegg
    • House of Lords
    • 24 Jun 1993,24 Jun 1993

    Fairness will very often require that a person who may be adversely affected by the decision will have an opportunity to make representations on his own behalf either before the decision is taken with a view to producing a favourable result: or after it is taken, with a view to procuring its modification; or both.

  • R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Simms
    • House of Lords
    • 08 Jul 1999

    Fundamental rights cannot be overridden by general or ambiguous words. This is because there is too great a risk that the full implications of their unqualified meaning may have passed unnoticed in the democratic process. In the absence of express language or necessary implication to the contrary, the courts therefore presume that even the most general words were intended to be subject to the basic rights of the individual.

  • Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission
    • House of Lords
    • 17 Dic 1968

    But there are many cases where, although the tribunal had jurisdiction to enter on the enquiry, it has done or failed to do something in the course of the enquiry which is of such a nature that its decision is a nullity. It may in perfect good faith have misconstrued the provisions giving it power to act so that it failed to deal with the question remitted to it and decided some question which was not remitted to it.

  • Woolmington v DPP
    • House of Lords
    • 05 Abr 1935

    Throughout the web of the English Criminal Law one golden thread is always to be seen that it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the prisoner's guilt subject to what I have already said as to the defence of insanity and subject also to any statutory exception. No matter what the charge or where the trial, the principle that the prosecution must prove the guilt of the prisoner is part of the common law of England and no attempt to whittle it down can be entertained.

  • Brown v Stott (Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline)
    • Privy Council
    • 05 Dic 2000

    The jurisprudence of the European Court very clearly establishes that while the overall fairness of a criminal trial cannot be compromised, the constituent rights comprised, whether expressly or implicitly, within article 6 are not themselves absolute. Limited qualification of these rights is acceptable if reasonably directed by national authorities towards a clear and proper public objective and if representing no greater qualification than the situation calls for.

  • R v DPP ex parte Kebeline
    • House of Lords
    • 28 Oct 1999

    In some circumstances it will be appropriate for the courts to recognise that there is an area of judgment within which the judiciary will defer, on democratic grounds, to the considered opinion of the elected body or person whose act or decision is said to be incompatible with the Convention.

  • London & Clydeside Estates Ltd v Aberdeen District Council
    • House of Lords
    • 08 Nov 1979

    When Parliament lays down a statutory requirement for the exercise of legal authority it expects its authority to be obeyed down to the minutest detail. At the other end of the spectrum the defect in procedure may be so nugatory or trivial that the authority can safely proceed without remedial action, confident that, if the subject is so misguided as to rely on the fault, the courts will decline to listen to his complaint.

See all results
Books & Journal Articles
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results