Crump v Gilmore
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Year | 1969 |
| Date | 1969 |
| Court | Divisional Court |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
4 cases
-
Isle of Wight Council v Platt
...have been assumed that "regularly" meant "sufficiently frequently". Some support from that view might have been gleaned from the case of Crump v Gilmore (1969) 68 LGR 56, where the magistrates had acquitted the parents because they had not known that their daughter was "bunking off" seconda......
-
Barnfather v Islington Education Authority
...rejected that contention and held that "unavoidable cause", like sickness, must be in relation to the child and not the parent. 8 In Crump v. Gilmore (1969) 68 LGR 56 the justices had found as facts that the parents of a secondary school pupil had not known about relevant absences until aft......
-
R (Khundakji and Salahi) and Admissions Appeal Panel of Cardiff County Council and Cardiff County Council
...attendance at school): see Hinchley v. Rankin [1961] 1 All ER 692 for the significance of the attendance register and Crump v. Gilmore (1969) 68 LGR 56 for the absolute nature of the offence. Further, a situation in which a child has to arrive late for school is incompatible with articles 8......
-
Bath and North East Somerset District Council v Jennifer Warman
...very hard case, but we felt that the statute was too strong; we could not go into the question of reasonableness." 9 In Crump v. Gilmore (1969) 68 LGR 56 Lord Parker of Waddington CJ, sitting with Ashworth J and Cantley J at page 59 referred to the facts of that case which related to twelve......
1 books & journal articles
-
Divisional Court
...and substantiveguarantees.On the issue of whether s. 444(1) imposed strict liability, the courtnoted the decisions in Crump vGilmore (1969) 68 LGR 56 and Bath andNorth East Somerset Council vWarman [1999] ELR 81, which both sug-gested that the liability of the parent did not depend on fault......