Ex Turpi Causa in UK Law
-
Gray v Thames Trains Ltd and another
“
It might be better to avoid metaphors like "inextricably linked" or "integral part" and to treat the question as simply one of causation. Can one say that, although the damage would not have happened but for the tortious conduct of the defendant, it was caused by the criminal act of the claimant? Or is the position that although the damage would not have happened without the criminal act of the claimant, it was caused by the tortious act of the defendant?
-
Saunders v Edwards
“
Where the plaintiff's action in truth arises directly ex turpi causa, he is likely to fail, as he did in Alexander v. Rayson, [1936] 1 King's Bench 182; J.M. Allan (Merchandising) Ltd v. Cloke, [1963] 2 Queen's Bench 340; Ashmore, Benson, Pease & Co, Ltd. v. A.V. Dawson Ltd. [1973] 1 Weekly Law Reports 828; and Thackwell v. Barclays Bank plc, [1986] 1 All England Reports, 676. Where the plaintiff has suffered a genuine wrong, to which allegedly unlawful conduct is incidental, he is likely to succeed, as he did in Bowmakers Ltd. v. Barnet Instruments Ltd.
-
Euro-Diam Ltd v Bathurst
“
It applies if in all the circumstances it would be an affront to the public conscience to grant the plaintiff the relief which he seeks because the court would thereby appear to assist or encourage the plaintiff in his illegal conduct or to encourage others in similar acts: see (2)(iii) below.
-
Patel v Mirza
“
In assessing whether the public interest would be harmed in that way, it is necessary a) to consider the underlying purpose of the prohibition which has been transgressed and whether that purpose will be enhanced by denial of the claim, b) to consider any other relevant public policy on which the denial of the claim may have an impact and c) to consider whether denial of the claim would be a proportionate response to the illegality, bearing in mind that punishment is a matter for the criminal courts.
-
Vellino v Chief Constable of the Greater Manchester Police
“
The operation of the principle arises where the claimant's claim is founded upon his own criminal or immoral act. The facts which give rise to the claim must be inextricably linked with the criminal activity. It is not sufficient if the criminal activity merely gives occasion for tortious conduct of the Defendant.
-
Hounga v Allen and another
“
Rules which rest upon the foundation of public policy, not being rules which belong to the fixed or customary law, are capable, on proper occasion, of expansion or modification" : Maxim Nordenfelt Guns and Ammunition Co v Nordenfelt [1893] 1 Ch 630, 661 (Bowen LJ). So it is necessary, first, to ask " What is the aspect of public policy which founds the defence?' and, second, to ask "But is there another aspect of public policy to which application of the defence would run counter?'
-
Clunis v Camden and Islington Health Authority
“
The court ought not to allow itself to be made an instrument to enforce obligations alleged to arise out of the plaintiff's own criminal act and we would therefore allow the appeal on this ground.
-
The ex turpi causa principle in Hounga and Servier
In Hounga v Allen the majority of the Supreme Court employed a test for the application of the ex turpi causa defence involving the balancing of public policy arguments for and against allowing the...
- Ex Turpi Causa – When Latin Avoids Liability
- Ex Turpi Causa and Gross Negligence Manslaughter
-
Ex Turpi Causa: Reformation not Revolution
Seldom has an area of law been so afflicted with uncertainties and contradictions as the illegality defence and rarely have judicial opinions been so sharply divided as in the Supreme Court decisio...
- UK Supreme Court Considers Ex Turpi Causa In Bilta
-
One-Man Company Engaging In Fraud Cannot Sue Its Own Auditors
... ... that relies on its own illegal conduct (applying the principle of ex turpi causa non oritur actio — often summarised as 'no court will lend its aid ... ...
-
Are Strict Liability Offences Indemnifiable?
... ... 's claim was made out, it would be barred on the grounds of the 'ex turpi causa' defence. It was this issue with which the High Court had to grapple ... ...
-
Antitrust Liability And Subsidiary Companies
In Tesco Stores Ltd & ors v Mastercard Inc & ors [2015] EWHC 1145, 24 April 2015, Mastercard was unsuccessful in attempting to strike out the claimants' antitrust claim in relation to the setting o...... ... ) sought to strike out the application under the principle of ex turpi causa on the ground that Tesco Bank, a wholly owned subsidiary of Tesco ... ...