Drug Driving in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • In Gallagher and Others for Judicial Review
    • Supreme Court
    • 30 January 2019

    A measure is not “in accordance with the law” if it purports to authorise an exercise of power unconstrained by law. The measure must not therefore confer a discretion so broad that its scope is in practice dependent on the will of those who apply it, rather than on the law itself. Nor should it be couched in terms so vague or so general as to produce substantially the same effect in practice.

  • NA (Pakistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 29 June 2016

    In relation to a serious offender, it will often be sensible first to see whether his case involves circumstances of the kind described in Exceptions 1 and 2, both because the circumstances so described set out particularly significant factors bearing upon respect for private life (Exception 1) and respect for family life (Exception 2) and because that may provide a helpful basis on which an assessment can be made whether there are

  • R v Hardie
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 31 July 1984

    If, when doing that act, he creates an obvious risk both that property will be destroyed and that the life of another will be endangered and gives no thought to the possibility of there being either risk, the requirements of the subsection are in our judgment clearly satisfied.

  • R v Knowles and Others
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 05 February 2015

    In considering that wider question the matters to which a judge will invariably have to have regard to include (1) the extent to which the offender needs treatment for the mental disorder from which the offender suffers, (2) the extent to which the offending is attributable to the mental disorder, (3) the extent to which punishment is required and (4) the protection of the public including the regime for deciding release and the regime after release.

  • Remi Akinyemi v The Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2)
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 04 December 2019

    The correct approach to be taken to the ‘public interest’ in the balance to be undertaken by a tribunal is to recognise that the public interest in the deportation of foreign criminals has a moveable rather than fixed quality. It is necessary to approach the public interest flexibly, recognising that there will be cases where the person's circumstances in the individual case reduce the legitimate and strong public interest in removal.

  • Ogundimu (Article 8 - New Rules) Nigeria [Upper Tribunal]
    • Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
    • 28 January 2013

    The natural and ordinary meaning of the word ‘ties’ imports, we think, a concept involving something more than merely remote and abstract links to the country of proposed deportation or removal. It involves there being a continued connection to life in that country; something that ties a claimant to his or her country of origin.

  • R v Dean Thomas
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 29 January 2020

    As set out above, in the Practice Direction it is observed that the appointment of an intermediary for the defendant's evidence will be a rare occurrence and that it will be exceptionally rare for a whole trial order to be made.

See all results
Legislation
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
See all results