Tuck v Priester
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 1887 |
| Date | 1887 |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
-
- 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
106 cases
-
In the Matter of Reservation of Points of Law under S21 Supreme Court Act (Ch37) [1983] PNGLR 396
...has failed to explain itself." A third important thing is that a penal section should be construed strictly: Tuck and Sons v Priester (1887) 19 QBD 629, 638, where Lord Esher MR says: "We must be very careful in construing that section, because it imposes a penalty. If there is a reasonable......
-
People (Attorney General) v Kennedy
...(4) [1940] I. R. 136. (5) [1923] A. C. 603. (6) 15 A. C. 506, at pp. 519, 520. (7) [1912] A. C. 305, at p. 310. (8) 7 Q. B. D. 198. (9) 19 Q. B. D. 629, at p. 638. (10) [1895] 2 Q. B. 264, at p. 271. (1) 2 C. & P. 585, at p. 589. (2) 20 Beav. 269. (3) 3 E. & B. 942. (4) [1895] 2 I. R. 603. ......
-
Inspector of Taxes v Kiernan
...imposition of liability from being created unfairly by the use of oblique or slack language. See Lord Esher in Tuck & Sons v.Priester (1887) 19 Q.B.D. 629, 638; Lord Reid in Director of Public Prosecutions v. Ottewell 1970 A.C. 642, 649; and Lord Denning M.R. in Farrell v. Alexander 1975 ......
-
Thompson v Dublin Bus
...AC 278 and a dictum of Lord Simonds at 313. Lord Simonds cited first the well-known passage of Lord Esher in Tuck & Sons v. Priester (1887) 19 Q.B.D. 629 at 638 in the following terms: – “We must be very careful in construing that section, because it imposes a penalty. If there is a reasona......
Request a trial to view additional results
4 books & journal articles
-
Preliminary Sections
...Nwako & Anor. (1978) 5 S.C. 1. 165 Toun Adeyemi v. Theophilus Awobokun (1968) 2 All N.L.R.318 ......149 Tuck & Sons v. Priester (1887) 19 Q.B.D. 629. 195 Tumahole's case (1949) A.C. 253. 16 U.S. v. Schwimmer 73 L.Ed. 889. ........ 16 UAC v. Owoade 13 W.A.C.A. 207 at 211. 313 Uccello v. Gold......
-
REQUIREMENT OF FAULT IN STRICT LIABILITY
...the purpose of the statute, s 9A Interpretation Act (Cap 1,1985 Rev Ed), and which is in favour of the defendant, Tuck & Sons v Priester(1887) 19 QBD 629; Teng Lang Khin v PP[1995] 1 SLR 372. 10 The concept of negligence best fulfils the policy of imposing liability in circumstances only wh......
-
DRINK DRIVING LAW: A WRONG TURNING IN THE ROAD TRAFFIC ACT?
...Statutory Interpretation (1992), section 271 (“Principle against penalisation under a doubtful law”). Also see Tuck & Sons v Priester(1887) 19 QBD 629, 638, 645; Lee Lai Siew v PP[1978] 1 MLJ 259; PP v Rajappan[1986] 1 MLJ 152. 44 Introduced by Road Traffic (Amendment) Act 1990 (No 7 of 199......
-
Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005: Statutory Interpretation
...the case with regard to penal statutes. A classicstatement of this position was provided by Lord Esher in Tuck & Sons vPriester (1887) 19 QBD 629:The Journal of Criminal If there is a reasonable interpretation which will avoid the penalty in anyparticular case, we must adopt that constructi......