R v Vine Street Police Station Superintendent. ex parte Liebmann

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Year1916
Date1916
CourtDivisional Court

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
14 cases
  • Madjai Sanusi v Pengarah Imigresen Negeri Johor and Others
    • Malaysia
    • High Court (Malaysia)
    • 1 January 1999
  • R v Bottrill, ex parte Kuechenmeister
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal
    • 30 July 1946
    ...Schaffenius v. GoldbergELR, [1916] 1 K.B. 284; and possibly in tort: Princess Thurn und Taxis v. MoffittELR, [1915] 1 Ch. 58Ex parte LiebmannELR, [1916] 1 K.B. 275, that a person hostile to this country who was on that account interned might properly be described as a prisoner of war, must ......
  • Oppenheimer v Cattermole
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 5 February 1975
    ...who might not in fact possess it, as may have been done in the case of Weber [1916] 1 K.B. 280 and [1916] 1 A.C. 421 and Liebman [1916] 1 K.B. 268. These, however, were cases in which a person who had never acquired British nationality was classed as an enemy alien in time of war owing to ......
  • Al-Waheed v Ministry of Defence; Mohammed v Ministry of Defence (No 2)
    • United Kingdom
    • Supreme Court
    • 17 January 2017
    ...as enemy aliens in the United Kingdom in time of war: Ex p Weber [1916] 1 KB 280; [1916] 1 AC 421, R v Superintendant of Vine Street Police Station, Ex p Liebmann [1916] 1 KB 268. None of these cases, however, decided that there is no jurisdiction to grant habeas corpus. They decided only t......
  • Get Started for Free
2 books & journal articles
  • Law and war: individual rights, executive authority, and judicial power in England during World War I.
    • United States
    • Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law Vol. 38 No. 2, March 2005
    • 1 March 2005
    ...1916, 5 & 6 Geo. 5, c. 104; see infra Part III.A.2. (61.) See R. v. Superintendent of Vine Street Police Station ex parte Liebmann, [1916] 1 K.B. 268 (examining the courts' authority to imprison an enemy alien civilian as a prisoner of war); R. v. Commandant of Knockaloe Camp ex parte F......
  • THE AGE OF EMERGENCY.
    • United States
    • Washington University Global Studies Law Review Vol. 20 No. 1, January 2021
    • 1 January 2021
    ...of detention were enhanced by the Liebmann decision, issued the following year. See R. v. Superintendent of Vine Street Police Station [1916] 1 KB 268 (Eng.); Vorspan, supra note 62, at (65) See EWING & GEARTY, supra note 24, at 55 n.78. (66) Rex v. Denison (1916) 32 TLR 528 (KB). (67) ......