Horsfield v Brown
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Year | 1932 |
| Date | 1932 |
| Court | King's Bench Division |
-
- 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
6 cases
-
R v Purdy
...rule which has been altered by statute. Both before us and it would seem at the trial, only the decision of Mr. Justice Macnaghten in Horsfield v. Brown 1932 1 King's Bench 355 was referred to. But there are references in that judgment to some nineteenth century cases which apparently had n......
-
Robert Tchenguiz and Another (Claimants in HQ12X05106 and HQ13X00672) v Rawlinson and Hunter Trustees Sa and Others (Claimants in HQ12X05082 and HQ13X00414) The Director of the Serious Fraud Office (Defendant to all claims)
...constable acts in obedience to the warrant, then, though the warrant be an unlawful warrant, he is protected by the Statute of 1750": Horsfield v Brown [1932] 1 KB 355 per Macnaghten J; cited with approval in McGrath (cited above) at [12] per Lord Clyde. The leading textbook in this area st......
-
McGrath v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary
...did something not covered by its authority. The Act of 1750 provided protection against the former danger. As Macnaghten J observed in Horsfield v Brown [1932] 1 KB 355,369: "If the constable acts in obedience to the warrant, then, though the warrant be an unlawful warrant, he is protected ......
-
Michael Alleyne v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
...premises or in detaining an individual but who acted with such lack of care as to cause reasonably foreseeable injury. 145 Moreover in Horsfield v Brown [1932] 1 KB 355, Macnaghten J stated, "but the constable in executing the warrant was bound to act in accordance with the law. He had no r......
Request a trial to view additional results