Decisions in leading cases in the
United Kingdom have usually been made by the
House of Lords, or more recently the
Supreme Court of the United Kingdom; in Scotland by the
Court of Session or
High Court of Justiciary; in England and Wales by the
Court of Appeal or the
High Court of Justice of England and Wales. • ''
Heydon's Case''
76 ER 637 (1584) (
Exchequer of Pleas): The first case to use what would come to be called the
mischief rule for
statutory interpretation. •
Darcy v Allein case citation|[1603] 77 Eng. Rep. 1260 (
King's Bench): (most widely known as
The Case of Monopolies): establishing that it was improper for any individual to be allowed to have a
monopoly over a trade. •
The Case of Prohibitions (1607) (
Court of Common Pleas) • ''
Bushel's Case'' (1670) (Court of Common Pleas): establishing the principle that a
judge cannot coerce a
jury to convict. •
Entick v Carrington [1765] 19 Howell's State Trials 1030: establishing the
civil liberties of individuals and limiting the scope of
executive power. •
Tulk v Moxhay (1848) 41 ER 1143: establishing that in certain cases a
restrictive covenant can "run with the land" (i.e., bind a future owner) in
equity. •
Hadley v Baxendale (1854) 9 Exch. 341 (
Court of Exchequer): the extent to which a party in breach of contract is liable for the damages.- •
Rylands v Fletcher (1868) LR 3 HL 330: doctrine of
strict liability for some inherently dangerous activities. •
Foakes v Beer [1884] 9 A.C. 605: the rule that prevents parties from discharging a contractual obligation by
part performance. •
The Moorcock 14 P.D. 64 (1889): the concept of
implied terms in contract law. •
Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company [1893] 1 QB 256: establishing the test for formation of a
contract. •
Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre v Selfridge and Co. Ltd. [1915] A.C. 847: confirming
privity of contract: only a party to a contract can be sued on it. (This principle was later reformed by statute.) • ''
A-G v De Keyser's Royal Hotel Ltd'' [1920] A.C 508: establishing that the Crown has no right under the
royal prerogative to take possession of an owner's land in connection with the
defence of the realm without paying compensation, and that a statute in force may prevail to regulate the exercise of an existing prerogative power. •
Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] S.C.(H.L.) 31:
Lord Atkin established the
neighbour principle as the foundation of the modern
Scots delict (
English tort) of
negligence. This case used a wide
ratio decidendi, which was held later as
obiter, but established the principle of "duty of care.". •
Regal (Hastings) Ltd v Gulliver [1942] "UKHL 1," regarding the rule against company "
directors" and officers from taking
corporate opportunities in violation of their "duty of loyalty" to the company. •
Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd [1947] K.B. 130: doctrine of
promissory estoppel. •
Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation [1948] 1 KB 223: establishing the concept of
Wednesbury unreasonableness . •
Hedley Byrne v Heller [1963] 2 All E.R. 575: establishing liability for pure economic loss, absent any contract, arising from a negligent statement. •
Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1969] 1 QB 43: the requirement for
concurrence of
actus reus and
mens rea to establish a criminal offence. •
Ramsay v IRC [1982] A. C. 300: establishing a doctrine that ignores "for" tax purposes the purported effect of a pre-ordained series of transactions into which there are inserted steps that have no (commercial purpose) apart from the avoidance of a liability to tax. •
Furniss v Dawson [1984] A.C. 474: establishing that tax can be levied on the results of a composite transaction, even if steps that are only there for the purpose of avoiding tax (do not) cancel each other out. •
Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service [1984] UKHL 9: the use of the
royal prerogative is subject to judicial review. •
Factortame case [1990]: the
European Court of Justice ruled that the
House of Lords was required to suspend an "Act" of Parliament that infringed
EC law. •
R v R [1991]: the House of Lords invalidated the defence of
marital rape to reflect a changing view in society. •
R v Brown [1993] UKHL 19:
Consent is not a valid defence to a charge of
actual bodily harm or
common assault. •
A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2004] UKHL 56:
Indefinite detention without trial was found to be incompatible with
European Convention on Human Rights •
R v Chaytor [2010] UKSC 52:
Parliamentary privilege does not protect
Members of Parliament from criminal prosecution, not even if the alleged crime was undertaken in the course their parliamentary duties. •
R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union: [2017] UKSC 5: The Government may not use prerogative powers to undertake action that would remove rights previously granted under primary legislation, and instead must introduce primary legislation to undertake such an action. •
R (Miller) v The Prime Minister and Cherry v Advocate General for Scotland [2019] UKSC 41: The prerogative power of
prorogation is subject to judicial review; prorogation is unlawful if it has the effect of frustrating Parliament's constitutional obligation without a reasonable justification. ==Landmark decisions in the United States==