Judges Rules in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • Monarch Steamship Company Ltd v Karlshamns Oljefabriker (A/B)
    • House of Lords
    • 09 Dic 1948

    It was necessary to lay down principles lest juries should be persuaded to do injustice by imposing an undue, or perhaps an inadequate, liability on a defendant. The Court must be careful, however, to see that the principles laid down are never so narrowly interpreted as to prevent a jury, or judge of fact, from doing justice between the parties.

  • Peart v The Queen
    • Privy Council
    • 14 Feb 2006

    (ii) The judicial power is not limited or circumscribed by the Judges' Rules. A court may allow a prisoner's statement to be admitted notwithstanding a breach of the Judges' Rules; conversely, the court may refuse to admit it even if the terms of the Judges' Rules have been followed.

    (iv) The criterion for admission of a statement is fairness. The voluntary nature of the statement is the major factor in determining fairness. If it is not voluntary, it will not be admitted. If it is voluntary, that constitutes a strong reason in favour of admitting it, notwithstanding a breach of the Judges' Rules; but the court may rule that it would be unfair to do so even if the statement was voluntary.

  • R v Osbourne
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 08 Dic 1972

    The Rules contemplate three stages in the investigations leading up to somebody being brought before a Court for a criminal offence. The first is the gathering of information, and that can be gathered from anybody, including persons in custody provided they have not been charged. At the gathering of information stage no caution of any kind need be administered.

  • Izuazu (Article 8 - New Rules) [Upper Tribunal]
    • Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
    • 29 Ene 2013

    We accordingly further endorse the Upper Tribunal's observation in MF that judges called on to make decisions about the application of Article 8 in cases to which the new rules apply, should proceed by first considering whether a claimant is able to benefit under the applicable provisions of the Immigration Rules designed to address Article 8 claims. If he or she does, there will be no need to go on to consider Article 8 generally.

  • Aiden Shipping Company Ltd v Interbulk Ltd (Vimeira)
    • House of Lords
    • 22 May 1986

    Such a provision is consistent with a policy under which jurisdiction to exercise the relevant discretionary power is expressed in wide terms, thus ensuring that the court has, so far as possible, freedom of action, leaving it to the rule-making authority to control the exercise of discretion (if it thinks it right to do so) by the making of rules of court, and to the appellate courts to establish principles upon which the discretionary power may, within the framework of the statute and the applicable rules of court, be exercised.

  • R v Prager
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 10 Nov 1971

    In an address to the Bentham Club in 1968, Lord MacDermott described "oppressive questioning" as "questioning which by its nature, duration, or other attendant circumstances (including the fact of custody) excites hopes (such as the hope of release) or fears, or so affects the mind of the subject that his will crumbles and he speaks when otherwise he would have stayed silent".

See all results
Books & Journal Articles
  • The Privilege against Self-Incrimination from Early Origins to Judges' Rules: Challenging the ‘Orthodox View’
    • Núm. 18-2, Abril 2014
    • International Journal of Evidence & Proof, The
    The history of the privilege against self-incrimination is one replete with contention and indeed confusion. This stems from the fact that the exact origin, initial purposes and very meaning of the...
  • Reviews
    • Núm. 28-1, Enero 1965
    • The Modern Law Review
    Lectures on Jurisprudence. By the late H. F. Jolowicz, edited by J. A. Jolowicz. Jurimetrics. Edited by H. W. Baade. A Text‐Book of Jurisprudence. By George Whitecross Paton. Third edition by David...
    ...... error in juries of different sizes with different rules about the majority necessary for a verdict. One of his ... with the public, and both the old and the new JudgesRules are inadequate in this context. While wishing to ......
  • On Judgment: Managing Emotions in Trials of Crimes Against Humanity in Argentina
    • Núm. 29-6, Diciembre 2020
    • Social & Legal Studies
    For over a decade, judicial accountability of mass human rights violations committed during the last civil-military dictatorship in Argentina (1976–1983) has been carried out in federal courts by r...
    ...... (1976–1983) has been carried out in federal courts by regular judges, following the rules of the National Code of Criminal Procedure. Research ......
  • Truth through Court Interpreters
    • Núm. 13-3, Julio 2009
    • International Journal of Evidence & Proof, The
    This article examines the law and ethical principles applicable to the interpretation of trial evidence as developed in Hong Kong, but with comparative reference to other jurisdictions where pertin...
    ...... a general lack of awareness amongst legal practitioners and judges of the evidential and ethical rules applicable to court interpretation, ......
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT