rigby v chief constable of northamptonshire case summary

Once a constable had taken charge of a road traffic situation which, without control by him, presented a grave and immediate risk of death or serious injury to road users likely to be affected by the particular hazard, it seemed consistent with the underlying principle of neighbourhood for the law to regard him as being in such a relationship with road users as to satisfy the requisite element of proximity. Facts: The police had the Yorkshire ripper in custody, but they did not hav enough information on which to charge him, so they released him. The parents could be primary victims or secondary victims. 328, C.A. A schoolteacher harassed a pupil. So, in terms of the actual way the police carried things out there is a duty owed - so they were negligence, Facts: Smith lived with his lover Mr Jeffrey. Rigby v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire [1985] Facts: In this case the police were chasing an armed psychopath who had locked . The court concluded that this threshold had not been met, so the police were not guilty. 2. The Countess of Dunmore (C) was looking to change servant and wrote to Lady Agnew (LA) requesting information on the character of one of her servants By the nature of the mortgage, terms of repayment of the debts are incorporated in the document. 1. The child was removed from the mothers care. duty of care cases and quotes. ameliabuckley10. Rigby v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire [1985] 2 All ER 985, Taylor J. It was well established that persons exercising a particular skill or profession might owe a duty of care in the performance to people who it could be foreseen would be injured if due skill and care were not exercised and if injury or damage could be shown to have been caused by the lack of care. Held: The officer in charge . Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of LawTeacher.net. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience. In Rigby v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire (1985) (HC) the police had released CS gas into a property that caused a fire. Learn how to effortlessly land vacation schemes, training contracts, and pupillages by making your law applications awesome. Woollerton and Wilson v Richard Costain [1970] 1 All ER 483; Hobson v Gorringe [1897] 1 Ch 182; Immunity not needed to ensure that advocates would respect their duty to the court, 3. swarb.co.uk is published by David Swarbrick of 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire, HD6 2AG. He was arrested and charged with theft. rigby v chief constable of northamptonshire case summary. The recognition of the duty of care did not of itself impose unreasonably high standards. The owner sued the police for negligence, and the judge said the defence of necessity is not available when the relevant circumstances are the result of D's own negligence in the first place. June 30, 2022 . . the police must have known or ought to have known at the time of the existence of a real and immediate risk to the life of Van Colle). The plaintiff also had to show that the circumstances were such as to raise a duty of care at common law. Courts should be extremely reluctant to impose a common law duty of care in the exercise of discretionary powers or duties conferred by Parliament for social welfare purposes. Mr. Keegan was, in that period prominent in local affairs there and was the father of Peter Charles Keegan of Van Buren, one of Maine's famous men of today. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. 54506919 Tort Law Caselist. Registered office: Creative Tower, Fujairah, PO Box 4422, UAE. 6-A Side Mini Football Format. .Cited Hertfordshire Police v Van Colle; Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police HL 30-Jul-2008 Police Obligations to Witnesses is Limited A prosecution witness was murdered by the accused shortly before his trial. The duty imposed on a local education authority to have regard to the need for securing special treatment for children in need of such treatment left too much to be decided by the authority to indicate that parliament intended to confer a private right of action and the involvement of parents at every stage of the decision-making process under the 1981 Act and their rights of appeal against the authoritys decisions showed that Parliament did not intend, in addition, to confer a right to sue for damages. 3. Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police [2008] EWCA Civ 39 (5 February 2008) In this decision, the UK Court of Appeal held that a claim in negligence against the police for failing to protect life should have regard to the duties imposed and standards required by art 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights.. Facts. Under certain circumstances, where the activity is one of social importance, it may be justifiable to take even a substantial risk. The case mentions the flood was one of extraordinary violence, but floods of extraordinary violence must be anticipated as events that are likely to take place from time to time. Any information contained in this case summary does not constitute legal advice and should be treated as educational content only. Appealed in Z v United Kingdom judgment was given in favour of the claimants. 5. the existence of alternative remedies under s76 of the Child Care Act 1980 and the powers of investigation of the local authority ombudsman. 5. He changed his name by deed poll to the pupils surname. The case will now proceed to trial under the Human Rights Act. Surveyor acting for the vessels classification society recommended permanent repairs but the owners effected temporary repairs having persuaded the surveyor to change his recommendation. In-text: (Alexandrouv oxford, [1993]) Your Bibliography: Alexandrouv oxford [1993] 328 4 (CA). rigby v chief constable of northamptonshire case summary. .Cited Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police SC 8-Feb-2018 Limits to Police Exemption from Liability The claimant, an elderly lady was bowled over and injured when police were chasing a suspect through the streets. However, the plaintiffs deliberate and intentional act in causing injury to himself constituted fault as defined in the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945. He had committed 13 murders and 8 attempted murders over a five year period. This was because it was "doomed to fail" on the basis of applying the Hill test (i.e. 1. they had an operational duty to do things right. On the facts, there was no such special relationship between the plaintiff and the police because the communication with the police was by way of an emergency call which in no material way differed from such a call by an ordinary member of the public and if a duty of care owed to the plaintiff were to be imposed on the police that same duty would be owed to all members of the public who informed the police of a crime being committed or about to be committed against them or their property. Rigby v CC of Northamptonshire (1985) (QBD) . General rule - public policy driven: The police do NOT owe a duty of care to individuals, only to the public at large (Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire; confirmedin: Brooks v Commissioner of Metropolitan Police; Osman v UK; Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police). starbucks red cup campaign; best practice interventions debriefing; toni cornell height; shafer middle school staff; who are lester holt's parents; zillow off grid homes for sale montana; what channels can i get on roku in canada; . Held: Although it was found there was no violation of article 6, there HAD been a violation of articles 3 and 13 the absence of protection for the interests of the children in this case, and also the lack of a remedy in the form of compensation had violated their convention rights. The clans and elite families associated with the OByrnes and resolves many problems associated with their history and genealogy. A plaintiff alleging that a defendant owed a duty to take reasonable care to prevent loss to him caused by the activities of another person had to prove not merely that it was foreseeable that loss would result if the defendant did not exercise reasonable care but also that he stood in a special relationship to the defendant from which the duty of care would arise. .Cited Hughes v National Union of Mineworkers QBD 1991 The court struck out as disclosing no cause of action a claim by a police officer who was injured while policing the miners strike and who alleged that the police officer in charge had deployed his men negligently. Furthermore, on the evidence, there was no reason for the defendant to have had the new device in 1977, and he was not negligent in not having it at that date. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. rigby v chief constable of northamptonshire case summarydoes the wesleyan church believe in speaking in tongues. So this case began the article 6.1 controversy i.e. Facts: There was someone who was a known suicide risk who was put in custody. The UK was held neither to have protected the children from inhuman or degrading treatment (a breach of art 3 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)) nor to have given them an effective legal remedy for this failure (a breach of art 13 ECHR). These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. Categories of claims against public authorities for damages. The parents reported the teacher to the police, but the police took no action. Smith brought an action against the police for their failure to provide adequate protection. . A mere error of judgement was not in itself enough to show a breach of duty. Furthermore . Claim struck out by trial judge and CA, would be restored. example of satire in a sentence 0.00 $ Cart. The Facts. Facts: Van Colle employed Mr Broughman as a technician at his optical practice. Three months into the employment hey had an argument resulting in a physical confrontation. built upon the famous neighbour principle set out by Lord Atkin in . D doesnt need proprietary interest but must have control of the source of danger. R ecent cases in A ustralia and the U nited K ingdom have confirm ed that w hile blanket im m unity from negligence actions for police involved in investigatory . Jacqueline' Mother made a claim against the Chief Constable on the grounds that the police had been negligent in . 1. 23 Cambridge Water Co Ltd v Eastern Counties Leather plc [1994] 1 All ER 53 at pp 75 and 76. (c) Plaintiff alleged that although he did not have any serious disability and was of at least average ability the local education authority had either placed him in special schools which were not appropriate to his educational needs or had failed to provide any schooling for him at all with the result that his personal and intellectual development had been impaired and he had been placed at a disadvantage in seeking employment. This eBook is constructed by lawyers and recruiters from the world's leading law firms and barristers' chambers. 4. Rigby v. Chief Constable of Northamptonshire [1985] 1 W.L.R. In the case of children with special educational needs, although they were members of a limited class for whose protection the statutory provisions were enacted, there was nothing in the Acts which demonstrated a parliamentary intention to give that class a statutory right of action for damages. ashley sommerford dining table; how to say very good'' in russian; when does the school call cps 2. The claimant who was present, but not involved in any of the . rigby v chief constable of northamptonshire. 985 A press photographer working in the arena at a horse show was severely injured when he tripped while trying to get out of the way of D's horse as it tried to take a corner too fast. its all about whether or not you are giving people a fair trial by simply striking out a claim if it concerns the negligence of the police. rigby v chief constable of northamptonshire case summary. The Claimants originally made claims against the Chief Constable but those claims were discontinued on 27 July 2020. police, should not be under a duty of care to potential victims. No equipment had been present at the time and the fire had broken out and spread very quickly. Cost of insurance would be passed on to shipowners, 3. can lpc diagnose in missouri My account. Their appeals would therefore be dismissed. You could say it was the psychopaths fault, because if he hadn;t gone into the building in the first place then this would never have happened. To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below: UK law covers the laws and legislation of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. A fire did break out and the owner of the shop successfully sued the police for negligence. Held: The defence of necessity might be available to police officers when looking at a claim for damage to property. Summary: Appeal concerning whether a damages claim arising out of the fatal shooting of the deceased by a police officer should be permitted to proceed. (a) Plaintiff alleged that his local education authority had failed to ascertain that he suffered from a learning disorder which required special educational provision, that it had wrongly advised his parents and that even when pursuant to the Education Act 1981 it later acknowledged his special needs, it had wrongly decided that the school he was then attending was appropriate to meet his needs. They were liable in negligence for damage caused by the resulting fire because they had failed to take the usual precaution of having fire-fighting equipment standing by. Held: The majority (5:2) dismissed the negligence claim - they decided this because this came under a policy matter (i.e. 6 terms. But, this dangerous psychopath probably hasnt got much money, so Rigby sues the police knowing they will have money, Held: The court considered this: should the police have acquired new CS gas canisters that did not have the risk of causing damage to the building? Defendant and his officers had been negligent in failing to react to the departure of the fire-fighting equipment by arranging to have other fire fighting equipment available The court held the "effective remedy" which must be provided did not necessarily have to be in negligence. 1/7/23, 9:39 PM Tort Law Cases - Summary The Law of Tort about:blank 3/53 Desmond v Chief Constable of Nottinghamshire (2011): CRB checks Police negligent in getting correct information about a man who was wrongly accused of sexually assaulting a woman. The various public authorities dealt with in this handout are as follows: Ship developed a crack in the hull while at sea. There was no justification for a blanket immunity in their cases. Tort law 100% (9) 106. Facts: The claimants from X v Bedfordshire CC [1995] (their claims in negligence having been struck out) brought an action against the UK alleging violation of article 6 of the ECHR (the right to a fair trial), 3 (freedom from inhuman and degrading treatment), 8 (respect for private and family life), and 13 (right to compensation in the event of a violation of one of the substantive rights). There had been a real . In other words, where the claimant could show breach of the Human Right Act, the UK might decide to grant a remedy under Act, but STILL hold that policy reasons prevented a Duty of Care of the local authority in negligence. Case: Rigby & anor v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire [1985] 1 WLR 1242. While a decision to take a child into care pursuant to a statutory power was not justiciable, it did not follow that, having taken a child into care, a local authority could not be liable for what it or its employees did in relation to the child. The police were under no duty of care to protect road users from, or to warn them of, hazards discovered by the police while going about their duties on the highway, and there was in the circumstances no special relationship between the plaintiffs and the police giving rise to an exceptional duty to prevent harm from dangers created by another. Free resources to assist you with your legal studies! 9 terms. JD v East Berkshire Community Health NHS Trust, re the wrongfully accused parent no such turnaround, Arthur Getis, Daniel Montello, Mark Bjelland, Operations Management: Sustainability and Supply Chain Management. The vessel sank a week later. Week 21), The effect of s78 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 Essay, 314255810 02 Importance of Deen in Human Life, Importance of Studying Child and Adolescent Development, Statistical Distribution Theory - Lecture notes - Chapter 1 - 6, Introduction to Computer Systems Exam Questions/Answers Sample 2016 (Another one), Q3 Hubert's story - An explanation of the difference between emotions and feelings, Investigating Iron Tablets, A PAG for OCR Chemistry Students, Acoples-storz - info de acoples storz usados en la industria agropecuaria. In-house law team. P eat v L in [2004] Q S C 219, [10]; P olice Services A dm inistration A ct 1990 (Q ld) s 10.5. In actions for breach of statutory duty simpliciter a breach of statutory duty was not by itself sufficient to give rise to any private law cause of action. rigby v chief constable of northamptonshire case summary. It was at least arguable that a special relationship existed between the police and an informant who passed on information in confidence implicating a person known to be violent which distinguished the information from the general public as being particularly at risk and gave rise to a duty of care on the police to keep such information secure. Jacqueline Hill was the final victim of Peter Sutcliffe (the Yorkshire Ripper). Continue reading "Duty of care: Its a fair cop", St Johns Chambers (Chambers of Matthew White) |, Patrick West explores a recent Supreme Court case on police liability Is there a general rule that police are not under any duty of care when discharging their function of investigating and preventing crime? Everyone who has passed through law school will remember the case about the snail in the ginger beer. The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom Parliament Square London SW1P 3BD T: 020 7960 1886/1887 F: 020 7960 1901 www.supremecourt.uk 8 February 2018 PRESS SUMMARY Robinson (Appellant) v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (Respondent)[2018] UKSC 4 They were liable in negligence for damage caused by the resulting fire because they had failed to take the usual precaution of having fire-fighting equipment standing by. In that context and having regard to the fact that the discharge of the statutory duty depended on the subjective judgment of the local authority, the legislation was inconsistent with any parliamentary intention to create a private cause of action against those responsible for carrying out the difficult functions under the legislation if, on subsequent investigation with the benefit of hindsight, it was shown that they had reached an erroneous conclusion and therefore failed to discharge their statutory duties. She phoned the police, but the police operators were not really paying much attention and were a bit slow passing it on to different operators - so the police were slow to respond. presumption against a duty of care for public bodies and omission, i.e. Do you have a 2:1 degree or higher? Likewise, educational psychologists and other members of the staff of an education authority, including teachers, owed a duty to use reasonable professional skill and care in the assessment and determination of a childs educational needs and the authority was vicariously liable for any breach of such duties by their employees. This came udner a policy matter in terms of allocation of resources, so the court held that they were not negligent for not getting better CS canisters, The court also question whether the police should have put better things in place (such as, fire equipment) had they used these particular canisters. The focus . But how else can the decision in Brooks be explained? However, in the education cases a local authority was under a duty of care in respect of the service in the form of psychological advice which was offered to the public since, by offering such a service, it was under a duty of care to those using the service to exercise care in its conduct. Obiter statement on Osman v UK, per Lord Browne-Wilkinson. As they arrested him they fell over on top of her. 2023 Digestible Notes All Rights Reserved. So, Osman took the case to the European Court of Human Rights. They claimed also under the 1998 Act. The House of Lords held in favour of the police: no duty of care was owed by the police. So might be an education officer performing the authoritys functions with regard to children with special educational needs. In three separate cases, clients brought claims for negligence against their former solicitors. Case Comment Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire personal injury - liability - negligence (CA (Civ Div), Hallett L.J., Sullivan L.J., Arnold J., February 5, 2014, [2014] EWCA . Even bearing in mind the pressures and burdens on the police officers in the situation with which they were dealing, they had a duty of care to the shop owner and they were in breach of that duty. In the education cases the authorities were under no liability at common law for the negligent exercise of the statutory discretions conferred on them by the Education Acts but could be liable, both directly and vicariously, for negligent advice given by their professional employees. Broughman then started to harass Mr Van Colle to pressure him into not giving evidence. It is undoubtedly a case of directly-caused harm. The solicitors relied on the immunity of advocates from suits for negligence, and claims were struck out. Furthermore, it would not be in the public interest to impose such a duty of care on the police as it would not promote the observance of a higher standard of care by the police, but would result in a significant diversion of resources from the suppression of crime. Note, however, Lord Brown said a claim under the Human Rights Act here is "irresistable". no duty of care upon a fire service which failed adequately to respond to a fire i.e. The case of Hill v chief constable of west Yorkshire, discussed below, might be such a case. truffle pasta sauce recipe; when is disney channel's zombies 3 coming out; bitcoin monthly returns An escaping criminal was injured when the following police car crashed into his. TORT LAWCOPYRIGHT YOURGD 214 YOURGD.CO.U 223 Do the POLICE owe a duty of care? In the abuse cases a common law duty of care would be contrary to the whole statutory system set up for the protection of children at risk, which required the joint involvement of many other agencies and persons connected with the child, as well as the local authority, and would impinge on the delicate nature of the decisions which had to be made in child abuse cases and, in the education cases, administrative failures were best dealt with by the statutory appeals procedure rather than by litigation. It may also contain certain rights, but invariably Our academic writing and marking services can help you! 9 . The defendant was accused of breaking and entering a burial ground and removing the remains of his mother who was buried there. It was decided in the case of Swinney v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police (No 2) (1999) . The saving of life or limb justified the taking of considerable risks, and in cases of emergency the standard of care demanded is adjusted accordingly. Since it was for the authority, not for the courts, to exercise a statutory discretion conferred on it by Parliament, nothing the authority did within the ambit of the discretion could be actionable at common law, but if the decision was so unreasonable that it fell outside the ambit of the discretion conferred on the authority that could give rise to common law liability. At 11.57 he was checked and everything with him seemed fine. However, the House of Lords applied the case of Osman v Ferguson [1993] (i.e. This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Watt v Hertfordshire CC [1954] 2 All ER 368, CA. Before making any decision, you must read the full case report and take professional advice as appropriate. Highway authority did not take any action to remove an earth bank on railway land which obstructed a motorcyclists view, leading to an accident. The CA later held that the claims fell outside the scope of the immunity and that they should not have been struck out. Do the police have responsibility? 31 It would also contradict many other cases, such as Knightley v Johns 32 and Rigby v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire, 33 in which liability for directly-caused harm was imposed. giving a blanket immunity to the police was contrary to the art 6 ECHR of right of access to the courts. Plaintiff police woman attacked by prisoner in a cell; police inspector standing nearby did not help, Appeal against judgment for the plaintiff dismissed. Police called out by burglar alarm at plaintiffs shop, failed to inspect rear of shop where burglars were hiding, who then removed goods. (a) Psychiatrist and social worker interviewed a child suspected of having been sexually abused and wrongly assumed from the name given by the child that the abuser was the mothers current boyfriend, who had the same first name (rather than a cousin). A chief constable owed road users a duty of care where his officers had taken control of a hazardous road traffic situation, in this case a collapsed bridge, but later left the hazard unattended and without having put up cones, barriers or other signs. Only full case reports are accepted in court. The argument was founded upon 3 cases: Austin and Saxby v Commissioner of PolicePOLR [2007] Police Law Reports 182, Rigby v Chief Constable of NorthamptonshireWLR[1985] 1 WLR 1242 and R v Bournewood Community and Mental Health NHS Trust ex p LELR . . Jeffrey wanted to resume the relationship but Smith did not. The Court of Appeal reversed the decision and the police appealed. They said that the police were resonsible for the death as that person was in custody, but he was 50% contributory negligent to his own death, FOOL-PROOF methods of obtaining top grades, SECRETS your professors won't tell you and your peers don't know, INSIDER TIPS and tricks so you can spend less time studying and land the perfect job. In respect of the claims for breach of duty of care in both the abuse and education cases, assuming that a local authoritys duty to take reasonable care in relation to the protection and education of children did not involve unjusticiable policy questions or decisions which were not within the ambit of the local authoritys statutory discretion, it would nevertheless not be just and reasonable to impose a common law duty of care on the authority in all the circumstances. On 10 March 2003, Mr Smith was attacked with a claw-hammer by his former . Chief Constable of West Yorkshire v Khan [2001] 1 WLR 1947 HL, Nagarajan v London Regional Transport [2000] 1 AC 502, Chief Constable of Greater Manchester v Bailey [2017] EWCA Civ 425 and Page v Lord Chancellor [2021] ICR 912 CA considered and applied. Breaches could include failure to diagnose dyslexic pupils and to provide appropriate education for pupils with special educational needs. Court case. Wooldridge v Sumner [1962] 2 All ER 978, CA. not under policy issues- Rigby v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire (1985). and so failed to go to the scene and investigate. Once the police finally arrived he'd already killed her - he stabbed her 72 times. The duty owed by a police driver, said Sir John Donaldson MR, was the same as that owed by any other, namely, to exercise such care and skill as was reasonable in all the circumstances. The Yorkshire ripper then went and killed Hills daughter. That was so not only where the deliberate act was that of a third party, but also when it. 7(a). In the absence of any special characteristic or ingredient over and above reasonable foreseeability of likely harm which would establish proximity of relationship between the victim of a crime and the police, the police did not owe a general duty of care to individual members of the public to identify and apprehend an unknown criminal, even though it was reasonably foreseeable that harm was likely to be caused to a member of the public if the criminal was not detected and apprehended. Plaintiff parents sought the recovery of damages for alleged psychiatric illness suffered by them on discovering that their children had been sexually abused by a boy who had been placed with them by the council for fostering. The Caparo Test - Summary Tort Law - Tort Law . The constable crashed and sought damages for negligence against the . However, it is necessary to consider situations where a person, such as a public authority, has either a special position or a greater level of involvement in the chain of events leading to the damage (or both) in more depth. Tel: 0795 457 9992, or email david@swarb.co.uk, W v A Spanish Judicial Authority: Admn 21 Aug 2020, Austin and Saxby v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis, Hertfordshire Police v Van Colle; Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police, Michael and Others v The Chief Constable of South Wales Police and Another, Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police, British Airways Plc v British Airline Pilots Association: QBD 23 Jul 2019, Wright v Troy Lucas (A Firm) and Another: QBD 15 Mar 2019, Hayes v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax Loan Interest Relief Disallowed): FTTTx 23 Jun 2020, Ashbolt and Another v Revenue and Customs and Another: Admn 18 Jun 2020, Indian Deluxe Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Income Tax/Corporation Tax : Other): FTTTx 5 Jun 2020, Productivity-Quality Systems Inc v Cybermetrics Corporation and Another: QBD 27 Sep 2019, Thitchener and Another v Vantage Capital Markets Llp: QBD 21 Jun 2019, McCarthy v Revenue and Customs (High Income Child Benefit Charge Penalty): FTTTx 8 Apr 2020, HU206722018 and HU196862018: AIT 17 Mar 2020, Parker v Chief Constable of the Hampshire Constabulary: CA 25 Jun 1999, Christofi v Barclays Bank Plc: CA 28 Jun 1999, Demite Limited v Protec Health Limited; Dayman and Gilbert: CA 24 Jun 1999, Demirkaya v Secretary of State for Home Department: CA 23 Jun 1999, Aravco Ltd and Others, Regina (on the application of) v Airport Co-Ordination Ltd: CA 23 Jun 1999, Manchester City Council v Ingram: CA 25 Jun 1999, London Underground Limited v Noel: CA 29 Jun 1999, Shanley v Mersey Docks and Harbour Company General Vargos Shipping Inc: CA 28 Jun 1999, Warsame and Warsame v London Borough of Hounslow: CA 25 Jun 1999, Millington v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and Regions v Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Council: CA 25 Jun 1999, Chilton v Surrey County Council and Foakes (T/A R F Mechanical Services): CA 24 Jun 1999, Oliver v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 23 Jun 1999, Regina v Her Majestys Coroner for Northumberland ex parte Jacobs: CA 22 Jun 1999, Sheriff v Klyne Tugs (Lowestoft) Ltd: CA 24 Jun 1999, Starke and another (Executors of Brown decd) v Inland Revenue Commissioners: CA 23 May 1995, South and District Finance Plc v Barnes Etc: CA 15 May 1995, Gan Insurance Company Limited and Another v Tai Ping Insurance Company Limited: CA 28 May 1999, Thorn EMI Plc v Customs and Excise Commissioners: CA 5 Jun 1995, London Borough of Bromley v Morritt: CA 21 Jun 1999, Kuwait Oil Tanker Company Sak; Sitka Shipping Incorporated v Al Bader;Qabazard; Stafford and H Clarkson and Company Limited; Mccoy; Kuwait Petroleum Corporation and Others: CA 28 May 1999, Worby, Worby and Worby v Rosser: CA 28 May 1999, Bajwa v British Airways plc; Whitehouse v Smith; Wilson v Mid Glamorgan Council and Sheppard: CA 28 May 1999.