Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
33 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Graingers & Sons v Gough 1896 Advertisements generally not offers Wine merchant
|
wine list Not an offer to supply unlimited amount
|
|
|
Fisher v Bell '61 Display w/ price in window = merely invitation to treat Lord Parker CJ
|
p.35 Shop display
|
|
|
Pharmaceutical Soc of GB v Boots '53 Goods offered by customer at counter
|
not by shop on shelves
|
|
|
R v Clarke '27 Offeree must know of the offer
|
Offer not in contemplation when acceptance made
|
|
|
Williams v Carwardine 1833 But motives irrelevant
|
Dying woman gives info to clear conscience
|
|
|
Tinn v Hoffman 1873 Cross-offers
|
Identical offers cross in post
|
|
|
Re Mahmoud and Ispahani
|
1921).
|
|
|
Brock v DPP [1993] QB A term maybe broad The Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 used a phrase 'any dog of the type known as the pit bull terrier' which seems simple but led to problems. What is meant by type? In Brock v DPP the Queen's Bench Divisional Court decided that 'type' had a wider meaning than 'breed'. It could cover dogs who were not pedigree pit bull terriers
|
but had a substantial number of the characteristics of such a dog.
|
|
|
Whitley v Chappell [1868] [Statutory interpretation – literal rule] It is illegal to impersonate any person entitled to vote. Held: a dead person is not entitled to vote
|
so in D was acquitted.
|
|
|
Magor and St Mellons v Newport Borough Council (1952) HL [Statutory interpretation – purposive approach] Lord Denning; ‘We do not sit here to pull the language of Parliament to pieces and make nonsense of it. We sit here to find out the intention of Parliament and carry it out and we do this better by filling in the gaps and making sense of the enactment than by opening it up to destructive analysis’. (He was saying that by applying the literal rule the intention of Parliament could be destroyed). When this case was appealed to the House of Lords
|
Denning’s approach was considered by Lord Simonds as a ‘naked usurpation of the legislative function under the thin guise of interpretation…if a gap is disclosed the remedy lies in an amending Act’.
|
|
|
Thabo Meli v R(1954) Single complex transaction hut bashed thought killed
|
through off cliff
|
|
|
Miller (1983) HL Created dangerous situation therefore under duty to act tramp smoking
|
set fire
|
|
|
White (1910) CCA No factual causation "but for test" poisoned mother's drink
|
she died of heart attack
|
|
|
Jordon (1956) CCA Exceptional case - only medical case where causation broken
|
medical treatment "palpably wrong" stabs v
|
|
|
Cheshire (1991) CA no break in causation despite doctor's negligence shot
|
T performs tracheotomy
|
|
|
Michael (1840) CCR 3rd party intervention - need to be free
|
deliberate and informed Mother tries to kill illegitimate child
|
|
|
Roberts (1971) CA Voluntary? Conduct lead to action? Was reaction reasonably foreseeable? D frightens V - sexual advance
|
jumps out of car
|
|
|
Kennedy '99 D prepares syringe
|
gives to V
|
|
|
Dias Self-injection isn't unlawful D & V jointly buy heroin
|
D prepares
|
|
|
Cato Even if V consents no difference
|
still D's act If D injects V
|
|
|
Hayward (1908) Take victim as found her
|
thin skull rule Tells wife will give her smthg
|
|
|
Blaue (1975) CA Question is what caused death - answer is the stab wound
|
Lawton LJ D stabbed Jehovah's Winess
|
|
|
Matthews and Alleyne (2003) CA Matthews and Alleyne (2003) direction in Woolin - not a definition of intention - merely guidance to assist a jury - whether D had necessary intention. Thus
|
if the jury finds the D appreciated death was a virtual certainty
|
|
|
Cunningham (1957) CCA 1) foresight of the risk that his act will cause the relevant consequence
|
2) Broke into gas meter to steal coins. Gas escaped
|
|
|
R v G & another (2003) HL Returned to Cunningham view 2 boys aged 11 & 12
|
charged £1M worth of damage
|
|
|
Cadwell (1982) HL Objective Drunk
|
sets fire to hotel Claimed he was so drunk that risk of endangering lives didn't enter his mind
|
|
|
Duffy (1949) CA Element of planning
|
leading to classic Duffy direction Abused over long period
|
|
|
Ibrams & Gregory (1981) CA Lawton LJ approves Devlin's Duffy direction Abused by their pimp. Planned
|
5 days later went and beat him so badly they killed him
|
|
|
Ahluwalia (1992) The longer the delay
|
the stronger the evidence of deliberation by D He'd said he'd leave her 1 day - had held her hands on cooker the night before. When he slept
|
|
|
Thornton (1992) "Battered women's issue - sharpened knife
|
stabbed husband. Had told friends she'd kill him 1 day
|
|
|
Night of murder
|
he said he'd kill her 1 day"
|
|
|
Morhall (1995) Goff L - Both circumstances and characteristics may be relevant. Glue sniffer
|
taunted about it
|
|
|
Adomako (1995) HL A. D's conduct fell far below standard of reasonable doctor/driver/parent
|
etc. B. B. Conduct involved a risk of death C. Conduct so bad that in all the circumstances as to amount to a crime Anaesthetist not paying attention when tube dislodged
|
