Hicks v Faulkner
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1881 |
| 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
249 cases
- KHK Advertising Sdn Bhd v Siera Management Sdn Bhd (dalam likuidasi
-
Gibbs, Commissioner of Police v Attorney-General et Al
......What amounts to reasonable cause depends upon the statutory conditions for grant of the warrant. The statement of Hawkins, J. in (Hicks v. Faulkner8 Q.B.D. at 171) approved in the House of Lords in (Herniman v. Smith[1938] A.C. at 316) made with reference to malicious prosecution can ...In ( Hicks v. Faulkner 8 Q.B.D. at 171 ) Hawkins, J. said, in the context of a malicious prosecution case, that he would define reasonable and probable cause to be an ......
-
Challenger Technologies v Dennison Transoceanic Corporation
...... Reasonable and probable cause . We begin with the oft-cited passage from Hawkin J`s judgment in Hicks v Faulkner [1878] 8 QBD 167 , at p 171 where the learned judge defined `reasonable and probable cause` as . . An honest belief in the ......
-
Gervan Bennett v Sergeant Devon Grant and Attorney General
...suffered damages as a consequence of having been arrested and prosecuted. 68 Reasonable and probable cause was defined by Hawkins J in Hicks v Faulkner (1978) 8QBD 167 at 171 ‘an honest belief in the guilt of the accused based upon a full conviction, founded on reasonable grounds, of the e......
Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
-
Table of Cases, Volume 83, 2010
...[1932] AC 562 13Gillan and Quinton v United Kingdom, 12 January 2010, ECtHR 80–83Gregory v Gollan [2006] NZHC 426 12Hicks v Faulkner (1878) 8 QBD 167 182, 183Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [1989] AC 53 11, 14, 16, 17, 22, 184Hill v Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Police Services Board......
-
Court of Appeal
...hisdetaining aprisonerwhois in custodywhichcannotbe called lawful. Hereferred tothedictumof Hawkins J inHicksv Faulkner (1881) 8 QBD 167andthedecision inHendersonvPreston(1888) 21 QBD 362,wheregaolersjustifieddetentionwhichwasnolongerlawful. Those casesandthose of byelaws declarednolonger t......