Key Cases Paper 1

1. 1The literal rule [blank_start]Whiteley[blank_end] v [blank_start]chappell[blank_end] (vote) and [blank_start]LNER[blank_end] v [blank_start]Berriman[blank_end] (oiling)

   1. AWhiteley
   2. Bchappell
   3. CLNER
   4. DBerriman
2. 2The golden rule narrow approach [blank_start]Adler[blank_end] v [blank_start]George[blank_end] (vicinity)

   1. AAdler
   2. BGeorge
3. 3The golden rule wide approach [blank_start]Re Sigsworth[blank_end] (will)

   1. ARe Sigsworth
4. 4The mischief rule [blank_start]Smith[blank_end] v [blank_start]Hughes[blank_end] (prostitutes) and [blank_start]RCN[blank_end] v [blank_start]DHSS[blank_end] (abortion)

   1. ASmith
   2. BHughes
   3. CRCN
   4. DDHSS
5. 5The purposive approach [blank_start]R[blank_end] v [blank_start]RG[blank_end] (birth certificate) and [blank_start]Quintavalle[blank_end] (embryos)

   1. AR
   2. BRG
   3. CQuintavalle
6. 6Hansard [blank_start]Pepper[blank_end] v [blank_start]Hart[blank_end] (Lord Denning)

   1. APepper
   2. BHart
7. 7Example of binding precedent R v [blank_start]Emmett[blank_end] (lighter fluid) was bound to R v [blank_start]Brown[blank_end] (sadomasochist)

   1. AEmmett
   2. BBrown
8. 8Obiter dicta R v [blank_start]Gotts[blank_end] (father orders) followed the statement in R v [blank_start]Howe[blank_end] (duress is not available for attempted murder)

   1. AGotts
   2. BHowe
9. 9Dissenting judgement [blank_start]Candler[blank_end] v [blank_start]Crane[blank_end] [blank_start]Christmas[blank_end] (misstatement).

   1. ACandler
   2. BCrane
   3. CChristmas
10. 10Consent is not a defence for ABH/GBH- R v [blank_start]Brown[blank_end].

    1. ABrown

11. 11Duress is not a defence for attempted murder- R v [blank_start]Howe[blank_end] & [blank_start]Bannister[blank_end].

    1. AHowe
    2. BBannister
12. 12Distinguishing in Court of Appeal from [blank_start]Balfour[blank_end] v [blank_start]Balfour[blank_end] to [blank_start]Merritt[blank_end] v [blank_start]Merritt[blank_end] held the parties were separated.

    1. ABalfour
    2. BBalfour
    3. CMerritt
    4. DMerritt
13. 13Distinguishing in Supreme court from [blank_start]Wilsher[blank_end] v [blank_start]Essex AHA[blank_end](negligence) to [blank_start]Fairchild[blank_end] v [blank_start]GFS[blank_end] (asbestos)

    1. AWilsher
    2. BEssex AHA
    3. CFairchild
    4. DGFS
14. 14Overruling [blank_start]Candler[blank_end] v [blank_start]Crane[blank_end] Christmas was overruled by [blank_start]Hedley[blank_end] [blank_start]Byrne[blank_end] v [blank_start]Heller[blank_end] (negligent misstatement)

    1. ACandler
    2. BCrane
    3. CHedley
    4. DByrne
    5. EHeller
15. 15Using the practice statement R v [blank_start]G[blank_end] and [blank_start]R[blank_end] overruling [blank_start]Caldwell[blank_end] (fire hotel)

    1. AG
    2. BR
    3. CCaldwell
16. 16Liberty at stake R v [blank_start]Spencer[blank_end]

    1. ASpencer
17. 17Decisions in one Court of Appeal do not bind the other division [blank_start]Young[blank_end] v [blank_start]Bristol[blank_end] [blank_start]Aeroplane[blank_end]

    1. AYoung
    2. BBristol
    3. CAeroplane
18. 18Example of outdated judicial precedent case change [blank_start]R[blank_end] v [blank_start]R[blank_end]

    1. AR
    2. BR

Descripción

A level (Paper one) LAW Test sobre Key Cases Paper 1, creado por Sophie www el 30/11/2017.

Autor

Sophie www

Idioma

English

Visitas

0

Historial

Creado el 30 nov 2017 · actualizado el 30 nov 2017

Etiquetas

lawpaper onea level

Valoración

Aún sin valoraciones

Valora este test

Valora este test

Más sobre Statutory Interpretation Cases