Williams v Summerfield

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Date1972
Year1972
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
34 cases
  • Hanahoe v Hussey
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 1 January 1998
    ...SOUTHAMPTON CROWN COURT EX PARTE J & P 1993 CLR 962 R V SOUTHWARK CROWN COURT EX PARTE SORSKY DEFRIES 1996 CLR 195 WILLIAMS V SUMMERFIELD 1972 2 QB 512 R V LEWES CROWN COURT 1991 93 CAR 60 NIEMIETZ V GERMANY 1993 16 EHRR 97 R V CROWN COURT EX PARTE CUSTOMS & EXCISE 1989 AER 673 CONSTABULAR......
  • MCML Ltd (Formerly ED&F Man Capital Markets Ltd) v Southwark Crown Court
    • United Kingdom
    • King's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 17 April 2024
    ...must give the most mature and careful consideration to all the facts of the case (see amongst many instances Williams v Somerfield [1972] 2 QB 512 at 518 and Wood v North of England Magistrates' Court 2 [2009] EWHC (Admin) 3614 per Moses LJ at paragraph 29).” 150 The Court also emphasised......
  • R v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another, ex parte Fininvest SpA and Others
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 23 October 1996
    ...allegedly employed in the fraud. The position here could hardly be more different from that under consideration by Lord Widgery CJ in Williams v Summerfield [1972] 2QB 512 at 518, when, with reference to section 7 of the Bankers' Books Evidence Act 1879, he suggested that the period of disc......
  • R (S and Others) v Chief Constable of the British Transport Police and another
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 20 June 2013
    ...judges should be scrupulous in discharging that responsibility". 40 This echoed the approach of Lord Widgery CJ in Williams v Somerfield [1972] 2 QB 512, at 519 who observed that: "…generations of justices have, or I would hope have, been brought up to recognise that the issue of a search ......
  • Get Started for Free
2 books & journal articles
  • Divisional Court
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Journal of Criminal Law, The No. 56-1, February 1992
    • 1 February 1992
    ...indeed they have always done in relation to the samesituation under s 7 of the Bankers' Books Evidence Act 1879: cf WilliamsvSummerfield[1972]2 QB 512 with R v Maidstone CC, ex pWaitt[1988]Crim LR 384. In the present case, Bingham U spoke at length upon thedifficulty of balancing the two pu......
  • The constitutional invalidity of warrantless drugs searches in South Africa
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Police Journal: Theory, Practice and Principles No. 91-2, June 2018
    • 1 June 2018
    ...and have enjoined magistrates to be mindful of their important responsibil-ities in this context. Thus in Williams vSummerfield [1972] 2 QB 512, for example, LordWidgery CJ commented that, ‘generations of justices have, or I would hope have beenbrought up to recognise that the issue of a se......