Search results
Dec 16, 2022 · Stare Decisis—a Latin term that means “let the decision stand” or “to stand by things decided”—is a foundational concept in the American legal system. To put it simply, stare decisis holds that courts and judges should honor “precedent”—or the decisions, rulings, and opinions from prior cases. Respect for precedents gives the ...
- The Case of Proclamations, 1610
- Entick V Carrington, 1765
- R V Dudley and Stephens, 1884
- Carlill V Carbolic Smoke Ball Co, 1893
- Donoghue and Stevenson, 1932
- Fagan V Metropolitan Police Commissioner, 1969
- R V R, 1991
- The Belmarsh Case, 2004
Over 400 years ago, the chief justice, Sir Edward Coke, ruled thatKing James I could not prohibit new building in London without the support of parliament. King James believed that he had a divine right to make any laws that he wished. But the court opposed his view, and decided that the monarchy could not wield its power in this arbitrary way. By ...
Author and schoolmaster John Entick was suspected of writing a libellous pamphlet against the government. In response, the secretary of state sent Nathan Carrington, along with a group of other king’s men, to search Entick’s house for evidence. Entick then sued the men for trespass. The court decided thatthe secretary of state did not have the lega...
In this case, the survivors of a shipwreck who killed and ate the youngest and weakest crew member were prosecuted for murder. Their defence was based on “necessity” – that they needed to eat the boy, as they were unlikely to survive and the boy probably would have died anyway. It may have been a “custom of the sea”that cannibalism was allowed unde...
Mrs Carlill sued the manufacturerof the carbolic smoke ball – a device for preventing colds and flu – which had promised a reward of £100 for any one catching flu following the use of its product but then refused to pay out. The court decided that this promise, together with Mrs Carlill’s use of the product as directed, amounted to a legally bindin...
In a case originating in Scotland, Mrs Donoghue was given a bottle of ginger beer which allegedly containedthe decomposed remains of a snail. She claimed to have suffered shock and gastroenteritis as a result. But as she had not bought the drink herself, she had no contract on which to sue. Nevertheless, the court extended the lawof negligence to r...
To be guilty of a criminal offence, there often needs to be unlawful act accompanied by a guilty state of mind, such as a criminal intent. So, having accidentally driven his car onto a policeman’s foot, did Mr Fagan commit an assault when he decided not to remove it? Mr Fagan suggested not because he had no criminal intent at the time the car first...
The law is constantly evolving to meet changing social attitudes. In this case, the House of Lords swept away the common law rule that a man could not be guilty of raping his wife. The previous rule was based on a 1736 pronouncement that: The House of Lords ruled thatfor modern times, marriage is a partnership of equals and any other suggestion was...
The Human Rights Act empowered judges to review acts of parliament, to check if they are compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. Using this power, the House of Lords ruled thata statute which allowed terrorist suspects to be detained indefinitely without trial breached the suspects’ human rights. The caseshows how modern courts ask...
- Nicholas Clapham
People also ask
Does case law still play an important role in UK public law?
Do public law cases fit common law approaches to case law?
Are cases a source of law?
What are some examples of common law cases?
Jan 27, 2020 · Public Law Case Update - Top Ten Cases of 2019. As well as some headline grabbing Brexit litigation, 2019 featured many important cases for public authorities and those that deal with them. Our experts have chosen their top ten cases of 2019 that highlight an important principle or point of law for inclusion in our first update of the year. The ...
Abstract. This chapter argues that, despite the weaknesses of common law reasoning, case law still plays an important role in UK public law. It also explains how weaknesses in common law reasoning are resolved either through developing taxonomies which apply in a rule-like manner, or through moving towards reasoning from first principles.
Plessy v. Ferguson, legal case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on May 18, 1896, by a seven-to-one majority (one justice did not participate), advanced the controversial “ separate but equal ” doctrine for assessing the constitutionality of racial segregation laws. Plessy v. Ferguson was the first major inquiry into the meaning of the ...
- What is Plessy v. Ferguson?Plessyv. Fergusonis a legal case in which the U.S. Supreme Court put forward the controversial “separate but equal” doctrine, according to which la...
- What did Plessy v. Ferguson establish?Plessy v. Ferguson established the constitutionality of laws mandating separate but equal public accommodations for African Americans and whites. T...
- Why was Plessy v. Ferguson important?Plessy v. Ferguson was important because it essentially established the constitutionality of racial segregation. As a controlling legal precedent,...
- How did Plessy v. Ferguson affect segregation in the United States?Plessy v. Ferguson strengthened racial segregation in public accommodations and services throughout the United States and ensured its continuation...
Cases, in turn, interpret those statutes and regulations. Cases may be the sole source of the law when the doctrine is strictly a common law doctrine. Even when law is based on a statute, cases interpreting the terms and intent of the statute are invaluable tools for legal writers. Some methods for using cases, discussed in detail below ...
To continue a long-running theme of this book, the definition of public law is murky, however. In numerous indirect ways the broader concept of the law (a system of rules adopted by a country) always touches upon government and individuals—it is, of course, the government itself that makes law, judicial institutions and actors adjudicate law, and individuals are invariably effected.
